Summary
In People v. Land, 112 Ill. App.2d 345, 251 N.E.2d 92, we observed that the record there showed the defendant to be a recidivist, that he offered no evidence in mitigation, that the trial court could reasonably conclude that a fourth try at rehabilitation would be unavailing, and there approved a sentence of not less than four nor more than seven years on a charge of burglary.
Summary of this case from People v. WassonOpinion
Gen. No. 11,085.
September 22, 1969.
Appeal from the Circuit Court of McLean County; the Hon. WALTER A. YODER, Judge, presiding. Affirmed.
Robert E. Williams, of Bloomington, for appellant.
Paul R. Welch, State's Attorney, of Bloomington, for appellee.
Upon revocation of his probation, defendant was sentenced to serve not less than four years nor more than seven years upon a charge of burglary. He appeals from the sentence only.
The evidence in support of such revocation was that he had joined others in committing a subsequent burglary. He was then nineteen years of age. The excerpts from the record do not show that defendant testified during the revocation proceedings.
Defendant cites People v. Carroll, 76 Ill. App.2d 9, 221 N.E.2d 528, for the principle that an ideal sentence sufficiently punishes, adequately safeguards the public and rehabilitates the offender. This record shows that defendant had been offered rehabilitative processes since 1963 in youth camps and training schools for offenses of theft and auto theft. Granted probation for burglary in June, 1966, he resumed the practice of that art in January, 1967. Defendant cites the language of People v. Grigsby, 75 Ill. App.2d 184, 220 N.E.2d 498, as to unjust sentences. In that case the defendant was a first offender.
The record discloses that defendant is a recidivist and that he offered no evidence in mitigation. The trial court could reasonably conclude that the fourth try at rehabilitation required more than a minimal term. There is no such departure from the purpose and the spirit of the law as requires this court to alter the sentence. People v. Hicks, 35 Ill.2d 390, 220 N.E.2d 461.
The judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
SMITH and CRAVEN, JJ., concur.