Shanley v. Wells
Citations
- 71 Ill. 78
Syllabus
<p>1. Vagrancy—within meaning of ordinance. To authorize a police officer in arresting a person, without a warrant, for the violation of an ordinance declaring all persons vagrants who, not having visible means to maintain themselves, are found without employment, loitering or rambling about, or staying in groceries, drinking saloons, etc., there must be shown a want, of visible means of support, as well as the other facts.</p> <p>3. Assault and balee imprisonment—probable cause and want of malice no bar to action. If a party is assaulted, beaten and imprisoned by a police officer, in arresting him without authority of law, he will be entitled to recover in an action of trespass, no matter what may have been the officer’s motives. In such a case, probable cause that the plaintiff was guilty of a misdemeanor or violation of an ordinance, and absence of malice on the part of the officer, will afford no justification.</p> <p>3. Arrest—power of constable or police officer to arrest A constable may, without warrant, arrest any one for a breach of the peace committed in his view, and carry him before a justice of the peace; and in case of a felony actually committed, or a dangerous wounding whereby felony is likely to ensue, he may, upon probable suspicion, arrest the felon, and, for that purpose, is authorized, as upon warrant, to break open doors, and even to kill the felon if he can not otherwise be taken. The powers of policemen are not greater than those of a constable in this respect.</p> <p>4. In all cases not felonies, or likely to result in one, where the offense is not committed in the officer’s view, or the act done or threat made is not fresh, a constable or policeman has no authority to make an arrest without, a warrant.</p> <p>5. Same—burden, of proof to justify is on the officer. Where a policeman arrests a party as a vagrant, under a city ordinance, without a warrant, it is incumbent on him, when sued in trespass therefor, to show that the offense was in f
Judges: Scholfield
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Accarino v. United StatesD.C. Circuit· 1949-11-07· cited 128×
- Rhodes v. McWilsonSupreme Court of Alabama· 1918-05-30· cited 27×
- Adair v. WilliamsArizona Supreme Court· 1922-12-08· cited 26×
- Diers v. MallonNebraska Supreme Court· 1895-10-15· cited 25×
- Park v. United StatesFirst Circuit· 1924-01-02· cited 22×
- Schmitt v. KurrusIllinois Supreme Court· 1908-06-18· cited 17×
- Roberson v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1900-01-15· cited 14×
- Nelson v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1927-03-14· cited 13×
- State ex rel. Thompson v. ReichmanTennessee Supreme Court· 1916-04-15· cited 13×
- Meints v. HuntingtonEighth Circuit· 1921-09-03· cited 10×
- Markey v. GriffinAppellate Court of Illinois· 1903-08-28· cited 9×
- Land v. BachmanAppellate Court of Illinois· 1921-10-25· cited 4×
- Johnson v. EnglehardtAppellate Court of Illinois· 1930-02-03· cited 2×
- State v. LewisOhio Supreme Court· 1893-03-07
- Ramsey v. MansellAppellate Court of Illinois· 1924-06-25
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.