From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Boston

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District
Apr 23, 1975
27 Ill. App. 3d 246 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)

Summary

In Boston, cited in the above statement from Jones, the notice of appeal was filed after an oral pronouncement, discharging the defendant because of the speedy-trial provision, but before the written order was entered.

Summary of this case from People v. Mennenga

Opinion

No. 74-215 Appeal dismissed.

March 19, 1975. Rehearing denied April 23, 1975.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Randolph County; the Hon. CARL BECKER, Judge, presiding.

Herbert J. Lantz, Jr., State's Attorney, of Chester (Charles H. Stegmeyer, Assistant State's Attorney, of counsel), for the People.

Stephen P. Hurley and Thomas F. Sullivan, both of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Mount Vernon, for appellees.


This is an appeal by the State from an order of the circuit court of Randolph County dismissing the charges against the defendants on the ground that the defendants had been denied their rights to speedy trials. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1973, ch. 38, par. 103-5.

The defendants were each charged with offenses in the circuit court of Cook County but were found unfit to stand trial and were committed to the Mental Health Center in Chester, Illinois. It is alleged that on December 13, 1973, the defendants escaped from the Mental Health Center, kidnapped two police officers and forced the officers to accompany them to Carbondale, Illinois. The defendants were subsequently apprehended in Carbondale and were charged by indictment with the offenses of kidnapping, unlawful restraint and aggravated assault. On May 23, 1974, the trial court granted the defendants' motions to dismiss the charges in Randolph County because the defendants were not brought to trial within 120 days as required by statute. The State has appealed that order.

We do not reach a consideration of the merits of the State's appeal because we find that there is no basis for our jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed.

After a hearing on the defendants' motions for discharge on May 23, 1974, the trial court stated that the motions would be granted and indicated that a written order would be prepared. The State filed notices of appeal on June 21, 1974. Written orders granting the motions for discharge were not filed until July 10, 1974.

• 1-3 It has been held in several civil cases that if a notice of appeal is filed after the trial court has stated what its decision will be but before a written order is filed, the notice of appeal is not timely and the appellate court has no jurisdiction. ( Grissom v. Buckley-Loda Community Unit School District No. 8, 11 Ill. App.3d 55, 296 N.E.2d 624; Davidson Masonry Restoration, Inc. v. J.L. Wroan Sons, Inc., 2 Ill. App.3d 524, 275 N.E.2d 654; Belinski v. City National Bank, 133 Ill. App.2d 800, 270 N.E.2d 524; Green v. Green, 21 Ill. App.3d 396, 315 N.E.2d 324; Loveless v. Loveless, 3 Ill. App.3d 967, 279 N.E.2d 531.) We realize that some of the cases cited above rely partially upon Supreme Court Rule 272 (Ill. Rev. Stat., ch. 110A, par. 272), a rule applicable only to civil cases. We find, however, that a similar rule is applicable in criminal cases as well.

In People v. Deaton, 16 Ill. App.3d 748, 306 N.E.2d 695, the State sought to appeal an order of the trial court suppressing evidence. On June 14, 1973, a hearing was held on the defendant's motion to suppress, and the court stated that the motion was granted. The State filed a notice of appeal on the same day. On June 28, 1973, a written order containing findings of fact and conclusions of law and stating that the evidence illegally seized would be suppressed was entered by the trial court. The appellate court, citing Davidson Masonry Restoration, Inc. v. J.L. Wroan Sons, Inc., dismissed the State's appeal stating that notice of appeal was filed at a time when a judgment order was not in existence. The appellate court determined that it therefore had no jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

• 4 Supreme Court Rule 606(b) provides that the notice of appeal shall be filed within 30 days from the entry of the order or judgment from which the appeal is taken. (Ill. Rev. Stat., ch. 110A, par. 606(b).) The mere announcement of an order in court does not constitute the entry of that order. It follows that the order from which the State attempts to appeal in the case at bar was entered on July 10, 1974, not on May 23, 1974, when the court's decision was announced in open court. Thus, the State has not filed a notice of appeal within 30 days from the entry of the order, and we are without jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Accordingly, we find that the appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

G. MORAN and CARTER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Boston

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District
Apr 23, 1975
27 Ill. App. 3d 246 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)

In Boston, cited in the above statement from Jones, the notice of appeal was filed after an oral pronouncement, discharging the defendant because of the speedy-trial provision, but before the written order was entered.

Summary of this case from People v. Mennenga

In People v. Boston (1975), 27 Ill. App.3d 246, 327 N.E.2d 40, the trial court orally granted defendants' motions for discharge on speedy trial grounds, indicating that a written order would be prepared.

Summary of this case from People v. Toolen

In People v. Boston (1975), 27 Ill. App.3d 246, 327 N.E.2d 40, the State appealed from a May 23, 1974, order granting defendants' motions to dismiss various criminal charges.

Summary of this case from People v. Ervin

In People v. Boston (1975), 27 Ill. App.3d 246, 248, 327 N.E.2d 40, and People v. Deaton (1974), 16 Ill. App.3d 748, 749, 306 N.E.2d 695, it was held that notices of appeal filed prior to the entry of a written order by the court were untimely, improper, and must be dismissed.

Summary of this case from People v. Eddington

In Boston we held that where the State filed a notice of appeal after the trial court orally indicated its decision but before a written order was filed, the notice of appeal was not timely filed and we lacked jurisdiction.

Summary of this case from People v. Krug
Case details for

People v. Boston

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JAMES B…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District

Date published: Apr 23, 1975

Citations

27 Ill. App. 3d 246 (Ill. App. Ct. 1975)
327 N.E.2d 40

Citing Cases

People v. Mennenga

While both rules come under article II of rules on civil proceedings in the trial court (107 Ill.2d, art. II,…

People v. Allen

• 1 The State has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction and we have taken the motion…