Legal Opinion · Dissent

People v. Clelland

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided June 29, 1973No. 72-98Published

1Dissent

Mr; JUSTICE DIXON

dissenting:

The sole issue here is whether defendant was erroneously “convicted” for multiple offenses arising out of the same transaction.

The word “conviction” in its ordinary sense has one meaning and in its technical legal sense quite another. (24 C.J.S. Criminal. Law, sec. 1556.) A judgment or sentence is indispensable to a conviction in the latter sense of the term and the mere ascertainment of guilt by verdict or plea which satisfies the ordinary definition of conviction does not suffice. Also see 18 C.J.S. Conviction, page 97.

The question arose early in Illinois in…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. People v. PrimIllinois Supreme Court · 1972
  2. The People v. SchlengerIllinois Supreme Court · 1958
  3. The People v. DuszkewyczIllinois Supreme Court · 1963
  4. The PEOPLE v. WhittingtonIllinois Supreme Court · 1970
  5. People Ex Rel. Walker v. PateIllinois Supreme Court · 1973

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API