People v. Miller

2 Citing cases

  1. People v. Robinson

    18 Ill. App. 3d 804 (Ill. App. Ct. 1974)   Cited 28 times
    Declaring defendant's guilt from evidence heard earlier against codefendant

    And as to the trial court's admonitions to defendants before their guilty pleas were accepted, we find them adequate and in substantial compliance with the rule of the Illinois Supreme Court. (See People v. Miller, 3 Ill. App.3d 712, 279 N.E.2d 64; People v. Charleston, 14 Ill. App.3d 452, 302 N.E.2d 687 (Abstract opinion).) We turn, then, to the question whether defendants' pleas were voluntary.

  2. People v. Bolden

    7 Ill. App. 3d 730 (Ill. App. Ct. 1972)   Cited 10 times
    In People v. Bolden (1972), 7 Ill. App.3d 730, the trial court omitted the words "by jury" from its admonishment and also failed to mention the defendant's right to be confronted by the witnesses against him.

    • 1, 2 Defendant first argues that the trial court erred in accepting his guilty plea without first advising him of his constitutional right to remain silent. The essence of this right is the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Recent Illinois decisions of both the Supreme Court and Appellate Courts ( People v. Miller, 3 Ill. App.3d 712, 279 N.E.2d 64; People v. Mendoza, 48 Ill.2d 371; People v. Arndt, 49 Ill.2d 530, 276 N.E.2d 306; People v. Cotton, 3 Ill. App.3d 706, 279 N.E.2d 62), stated that the trial court is not required to specifically admonish the defendant of his privilege against compulsory self-incrimination before accepting his plea of guilty, but that it is required that the plea be accepted only after it is "understandingly and voluntarily" entered. Second, the defendant argues that he was not properly informed of his constitutional right to trial by jury before the trial court accepted his guilty plea in violation of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 402(a)(4).