People v. Wiley
Illinois Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Harrison
I agree that we should affirm Wiley’s murder convictions. I dissent because I would reverse Wiley’s convictions for armed robbery and remand for a new sentencing hearing.
Under our form of jurisprudence, the State must prove the essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Although circumstantial evidence may sometimes suffice to meet that burden, a conviction cannot be founded upon speculation or conjecture. (See People v. Burnside (1985), 133 Ill. App. 3d 453, 458.) Such a result is unconstitutional. A conviction based on a record lacking any relevant evidence as to a crucial…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Vachon v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- People v. BurnsideAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985