Court Opinion

ID: 9884551
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 03:01:22.826112+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:39.439307
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Crebs delivered the opinion of the court: Defendant was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in a bench trial by the circuit court of Piatt County. The Appellate Court, Fourth District, affirmed the conviction (101 Ill. App. 2d 69) and we granted leave to appeal. The circumstances of the trial are, to say the least, unusual. The State’s Attorney prosecuting the case was the only witness for the State. He testified that he attended an inquest at which he heard testimony about an automobile accident in which the defendant was involved and which resulted in the death of a woman. The State’s Attorney gave the names of the witnesses at the inquest, related their testimony, and said that their testimony was not based on hearsay. He also stated that he had made some independent investigation of the accident. Defendant’s counsel made no objection to the State’s Attorney’s testimony. As soon as the State’s Attorney left the stand both sides rested. Oral argument was waived. The court found the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Defendant moved for probation. At the probation hearing neither side presented evidence. Both sides argued for probation. The probation officer’s report was filed that morning with a recommendation for probation “with the special condition that he serve short sentence in a penal institution.” The court instead felt that it should “impose as a condition of this probation a very decisive jail sentence or a state farm sentence.” The court admitted the defendant to probation provided that a term of one year be served at the Illinois State Farm at Vandalia. The defendant appeals on the ground that the only evidence heard by the court was hearsay evidence and that such evidence was insufficient to prove him guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Without passing on the question of whether or not uncontradicted hearsay evidence standing alone could ever be sufficient in a felony case, we find this evidence insufficient. It was improper for the State’s Attorney to appear as a witness under the circumstances of this case. Also, there is no showing that any of the witnesses who testified at the coroner’s inquest were cross-examined or their testimony checked in any way. Thus, the State’s Attorney’s testimony is subject to the inherent vice of hearsay, i.e., the hearsay statements might be true without the related facts being correct. For these reasons we must reverse. Since the tried placed defendant in jeopardy and the error is the failure of the evidence to support the charge, there is no basis to order a new trial. Judgment reversed.