## Facts

- Clarence Hiller was shot and killed during a struggle with an intruder in his Chicago home in the early morning of September 19, 1910.
- Investigators found four impressions of a left hand in fresh paint on a recently painted porch railing near a rear entry point; the railing section was removed and the impressions were photographed.
- Shortly after the shooting, police stopped Thomas Jennings nearby; he wore torn, bloodstained clothing and possessed a loaded revolver later linked to the fatal bullets.
- Sand and gravel in Jennings’s shoes matched material found in a bed inside the home.
- Jennings had a prior burglary record; his fingerprint card was on file.
- Four fingerprint experts compared Jennings’s known prints to the painted-railing impressions and testified they were made by the same person.
- The defense challenged fingerprint identification as novel and unreliable and sought exclusion of the fingerprint testimony.
- Jennings was convicted of murder in the Criminal Court of Cook County; the jury fixed the penalty at death.

## Issues

1. Whether expert testimony identifying a defendant through fingerprint comparison was admissible despite the asserted novelty of fingerprint science and the absence of prior American precedent or statutory authorization.
2. Whether evidence of other offenses was improperly admitted, or was admissible under recognized non-propensity purposes such as identity, intent, or a common plan.

## Decision

- The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence.
- The court held fingerprint comparison testimony admissible as expert evidence of identity.
- The court concluded the record contained sufficient evidence of guilt, including fingerprints and other circumstantial proof.
- The court upheld admission of other-crimes evidence as relevant to permissible purposes (including identity and common plan), not merely to show propensity.

## Legal Principles

- Fingerprint identification may be admitted through expert testimony when the method is shown to rest on a reliable scientific basis and specialized knowledge assists the trier of fact.
- Novelty or lack of domestic precedent does not bar admission when the technique is supported by recognized scientific materials and demonstrated use in other jurisdictions.
- The jury determines the weight and credibility of expert identification evidence; admissibility turns on whether the testimony is a proper subject for expert proof.
- Other-crimes evidence is generally inadmissible to prove disposition, but may be admitted when relevant to issues such as identity, intent, or a common plan or design.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Jennings’s murder conviction, recognizing fingerprint comparison as admissible expert evidence of identity and holding that other-crimes evidence was properly admitted for limited, non-propensity purposes.


People v. Jennings, 252 Ill. 534, 96 N.E. 1077 (Ill. 1911)