People v. Tate

6 Citing cases

  1. People v. Banks

    227 Ill. App. 3d 462 (Ill. App. Ct. 1992)   Cited 9 times
    In Banks, this court found that a "deliberate act of self-defense would negate inferences of intense passion under provocation." Id.

    Clearly, then, defendant's own testimony destroys her theory that she shot the victims out of intense and sudden passion. See People v. Tate (1974), 25 Ill. App.3d 411, 419, 323 N.E.2d 485, aff'd (1976), 63 Ill.2d 105, 345 N.E.2d 480 (upholding jury's finding that defendant committed murder, not voluntary manslaughter, where defendant testified that she was not angry at the time the two victims were shot). In fact, defendant testified that she fired the gun because she was protecting herself, since she had been shot and there were as many as "50 guns" in the crowd of 25 people.

  2. People v. Guthrie

    407 N.E.2d 593 (Ill. App. Ct. 1980)   Cited 6 times
    In Guthrie, in the absence of a life and death witness, we found ample circumstantial evidence of the corpus delicti and we cited and discussed the pertinent statute making the coroner's protocol prima facie proof of the facts therein stated.

    ( People v. Schneider (1935), 360 Ill. 43, 51, 195 N.E. 430; Gendron, 41 Ill.2d 351, 360.) In People v. Tate (1974), 25 Ill. App.3d 411, 323 N.E.2d 485, aff'd (1976), 63 Ill.2d 105, 345 N.E.2d 480, a defendant convicted of two murders also argued it was not established that a body examined by two pathologists (whose findings as to cause of death were stipulated into evidence) was that of one of the victims shot by defendant. The court examined the circumstantial evidence of the case and concluded ( 25 Ill. App.3d 411, 422):

  3. State v. Louk

    171 W. Va. 639 (W. Va. 1983)   Cited 115 times
    Ruling on admissibility of evidence generally within the sound discretion of trial court

    F.2d 818, 823-24 (8th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 868, 102 S.Ct. 333, 70 L.Ed.2d 170; United States v. Hamilton, 452 F.2d 472, 479-80 (8th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 406 U.S. 925, 92 S.Ct. 1796, 32 L.Ed.2d 126; Gollaher v. United States, 419 F.2d 520, 527 (9th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 960, 90 S.Ct. 434, 24 L.Ed.2d 424; United States v. Gant, 487 F.2d 30 (10th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 941, 94 S.Ct. 1946, 40 L.Ed.2d 293; United States v. Lewis, 514 F. Supp. 169 (D.C.Pa. 1981); United States v. Kosovsky, 506 F. Supp. 46 (D.C.Okla. 1980); Bowens v. State, 54 Ala. App. 491, 309 So.2d 844, 847, cert. denied, 293 Ala. 746, 309 So.2d 850 (1975); State ex rel. Ronan v. Super. Ct. of Maricopa County, 95 Ariz. 319, 390 P.2d 109, 118 (1964); People v. District Court for Second Judicial District, 199 Colo. 398, 610 P.2d 490 (1980); United States v. Alexander, 428 A.2d 42, reh. denied, 441 A.2d 936 (D.C.App. 1981); State v. McFarlane, 318 So.2d 449 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1975); People v. Tate, 25 Ill. App.3d 411, 323 N.E.2d 485, 493 (1974), aff'd., 63 Ill.2d 105, 345 N.E.2d 480; Dinning v. State, 256 Ind. 399, 269 N.E.2d 371 (1971); State v. Martin, La., 376 So.2d 300 (1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 998, 101 S.Ct. 540, 66 L.Ed.2d 297, reh. denied, 449 U.S. 1119, 101 S.Ct. 931, 66 L.Ed.2d 847; State v. Curry, 262 La. 616, 264 So.2d 583, 585 (1972); State v. Cugliata, Me., 372 A.2d 1019 (1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 856, 98 S.Ct. 177, 54 L.Ed.2d 128; Sutton v. State, 25 Md. App. 309, 334 A.2d 126, 129 (1975); Commonwealth v. Carita, 356 Mass. 132, 249 N.E.2d 5 (1969); ( But see, Commonwealth v. Edgerly, 372 Mass. 337, 361 N.E.2d 1289 (1977)); State v. Guelker, Mo., 548 S.W.2d 521 (1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 941, 97 S.Ct. 2658, 53 L.Ed.2d 260, reh. denied, 434 U.S. 882, 98 S.Ct. 248, 54 L.Ed.2d 167, State v. Felter, 85 N.M. 619, 515 P.2d 138 (1973); People v. Buckman, 70 Misc.2d 220, 333 N.Y.S.2d 452 (1972); State v. Gall, 65 Ohio App.2d 57, 19 Ohio Ops.3d 39, 415 N.E.2d 1008, 1013, motion overruled, (1980); State v. Ro

  4. People v. Tate

    63 Ill. 2d 105 (Ill. 1976)   Cited 54 times
    Upholding accountability conviction where defendant gave weapon to shooter, "escalating the confrontation and precipitating the shooting."

    MR. JUSTICE RYAN delivered the opinion of the court: Mary Alice Tate (Mary Alice) and Willie Bryant (Bryant) were found guilty by a jury in the circuit court of Cook County of the murders of Othas Jameson and Freddie Tate. The appellate court affirmed their convictions ( 25 Ill. App.3d 411), and we granted Bryant's petition for leave to appeal under Rule 315 (50 Ill.2d R. 315). Mary Alice has not appealed to this court. In the afternoon on February 29, 1970, Mary Alice and Bryant found their 14-year-old daughter, Sabrina, intoxicated and ill.

  5. People v. DeBord

    61 Ill. App. 3d 239 (Ill. App. Ct. 1978)   Cited 13 times

    A motion for mistrial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and in absence of a showing that defendant had been prejudiced, we will not interfere with the trial court's discretion. E.g., People v. Tate (1974), 25 Ill. App.3d 411, 323 N.E.2d 485, aff'd (1976), 63 Ill.2d 105, 345 N.E.2d 480. Defendant argues that it was error for the State to remark, in closing argument, that defense counsel wasn't working for defendant "free gratis."

  6. People v. Musgray

    37 Ill. App. 3d 48 (Ill. App. Ct. 1976)   Cited 19 times
    In People v. Musgray (1976), 37 Ill. App.3d 48, 344 N.E.2d 708, it was held that the State bears a duty to disclose oral statement attributed to the defendant by police personnel under circumstances similar to the case at bar.

    A motion for a mistrial is addressed to the sound discretion of the court. ( People v. Tate, 25 Ill. App.3d 411, 422 (1974).) And in the absence of a showing that defendant has been prejudiced, we will not interfere with the exercise of the trial court's discretion.