(Download) "People v. Stanley" by Supreme Court of Illinois " Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: People v. Stanley
- Author : Supreme Court of Illinois
- Release Date : January 28, 1972
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 56 KB
Description
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court of McDonough County, entered following a hearing, denying defendant's
petition for relief under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act. Ill. Rev. Stat. 1969, ch. 38, par. 122-1 et seq. On August 3, 1966, the defendant and his wife, a juvenile, were taken into custody and the defendant was charged with burglary.
He was released on bond but his wife remained in custody. On September 15, the defendant, in an unsuccessful attempt to free
his wife, threatened a deputy sheriff with a loaded gun at the McDonough County jail and was again arrested and charged with
attempted murder and attempted armed robbery. Thereafter the defendant was charged with another burglary. He had retained
counsel of his own choosing to represent him on the original burglary charge and on September 27, 1966, the court appointed
the same attorney to represent him on the other charges and pleas of not guilty were entered. Subsequently the pleas of not
guilty were withdrawn and the defendant pleaded guilty to the two burglary charges and to the attempted armed robbery charge
and was sentenced to concurrent terms of not less than 10 nor more than 14 years for each offense. The attempted murder charge
was subsequently dismissed. No appeal was taken from these proceedings. The defendant later filed pro se a petition for a
post-conviction hearing and an attorney was appointed to represent him. A hearing was conducted thereon and the court denied
the relief prayed. This appeal followed and counsel was appointed to represent defendant on the appeal. This attorney filed
a motion for leave to withdraw stating that he could find no meritorious grounds for the appeal and supported his motion with
an extensive brief. The motion for leave to withdraw was allowed and the defendant has filed pro se a brief in support of
his appeal.