The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur, Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
On May 29, 2001 Derrick Hardaway ("Hardaway") filed a Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus ("Petition") under 28 U.S.C. § 2254*fn1 to
challenge his November 1, 1996 first-degree murder conviction on which he
is currently serving a 45-year sentence. In accordance with Rule 4 of the
Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts
("Section 2254 Rules"), this Court promptly reviewed the Petition and its
That threshold review prompted the issuance of a June 4 memorandum
order because the Petition posed issues that could not be evaluated from
that filing alone. That being so, this Court (1) ordered Warden Donald
Young ("Respondent") to file a responsive pleading in accordance with
Section 2254 Rule 4 and (2) appointed Thomas Geraghty, Esq. to act pro
bono publico as Hardaway's counsel.*fn2 Then, after reviewing
Respondent's Answer to the Petition and accompanying Exhibits (cited
"Ex. ___"), this Court found that a reply memorandum was required. That
is now in hand.
All of the filings to date have made it clear that the Petition is
amenable to disposition on those papers, without the need for an
evidentiary hearing (see Section 2254 Rule 8(a)). For the reasons stated
in this memorandum opinion and order, Hardaway's Petition is granted.
Under Section 2254(e)(1) the state court's findings of fact are
presumptively correct in any federal habeas proceeding. Accordingly, this
opinion draws from the recitation of the facts in the Illinois Appellate
Court's direct review of Hardaway's conviction, reported at
307 Ill. App.3d 592, 594-603, 718 N.E.2d 682, 685-91 (1st Dist. 1999).
Because that opinion's factual recitation is understandably much more
extensive and intermingles matters relevant to the current inquiry with
facts bearing on Hardaway's trial and conviction, what follows is a
distillation of the currently relevant facts rather than (as this Court
has done in other habeas cases) a verbatim reproduction of the Appellate
At 8 a.m. on September 1, 1994 three Chicago police detectives went to
Hardaway's home to question him (he was then 14 years old) and his
brother Cragg (who was then age 16) in connection with the death of
11-year-old Robert Sandifer ("Sandifer") the night before. Encountering
Hardaway's father, the detectives explained that they had information
that his sons had been seen with Sandifer shortly before his murder.
Hardaway's father woke him and brought him to the living room to talk
with the detectives (Cragg was not then at home)
Hardaway agreed to accompany the detectives to the police station to
help with the investigation. Although the detectives offered to give
Hardaway's father a ride to the station along with Hardaway, the father
declined in order to wait at home for his other son.*fn3 Before they
left, the detectives gave Hardaway's father their card and phone number
and told him the location of the police station. At that time the
detectives did not read Hardaway his Miranda rights or tell him that he
was a suspect.
Two detectives interviewed Hardaway shortly after he arrived at the
police station at about 8:30 a.m. Hardaway was still not read his Miranda
rights. In that interview Hardaway admitted he knew Sandifer but said
that he had not seen Sandifer for three days. Detectives then interviewed
Jimesia Cooper, a neighbor of Hardaway's, who said that Hardaway had left
her house the night before in the company of Michael Griffin and
Sandifer. Sandifer's body had been found
an hour after Cooper said they had left her house.
At about 10:30 a.m. detectives questioned Hardaway for the second
time. Hardaway repeated that he had not seen Sandifer for three days.
Hardaway was then informed of his Miranda rights and advised that if he
was charged in the case he could be transferred from juvenile court and
tried and sentenced as an adult. After the detectives confronted Hardaway
with Cooper's statements, Hardaway said that the previous night his
brother Cragg had told him to go get Sandifer and that Cragg then drove
off with Sandifer alone, leaving Hardaway and Griffin behind. At that
point Hardaway was placed under arrest. Detectives neither notified
Hardaway's parents that Hardaway was under arrest nor communicated with a
Throughout the day detectives repeatedly went to the Hardaway home in
search of Cragg Hardaway. While there detectives spoke with Hardaway's
parents, who continued to remain at home waiting for their other son.
Hardaway's parents phoned the police station twice (at noon and at 8
p.m.) to inquire about Hardaway.
Detectives first requested a youth officer for Hardaway at about 4
p.m., fully 9 hours after he had been taken into the station and 5-1/2
hours after his arrest. No youth officer was assigned at that time,
At 4:30 p.m. detectives began a third interview of Hardaway, though
still with no youth officer present. Detective McCann again read Hardaway
his Miranda rights and advised him that if he was charged he could be
tried as an adult. McCann then told Hardaway that Griffin had
contradicted Hardaway's story, and he took Hardaway to a room where he
could see that Griffin was at the station. Hardaway then admitted (1)
having gotten into the car with Sandifer and his brother Cragg and (2)
that he had been present when Cragg shot Sandifer shortly thereafter.
At 7 p.m. Detective McCann interrogated Hardaway again, this time
accompanied by Assistant State's Attorney Theresa Harney ("Harney"). For
the first time Youth Officer Geraci ("Geraci") was also present. Harney
explained to Hardaway that Geraci was a youth officer and that he was
present "as an observer to assist [Hardaway] if he had any questions or
any problems." Geraci asked Hardaway if there was anything he could
assist him with, and Hardaway told him "no." Harney read Hardaway his
Miranda rights and had Hardaway explain to her what his rights meant.
Harney also told Hardaway that if he was charged in connection with the
murder of Sandifer he could be tried and sentenced as an adult. Hardaway
then repeated his 4:30 p.m. admissions. Geraci observed Hardaway and said
later that the latter was not intimidated or abused in any way, but he
made no effort to speak with Hardaway alone.
Finally, at 10:45 p.m. Hardaway (who had then been in custody over 14
hours and had been under arrest for the last 12 hours of that period)
began to give a 22-page court-reported statement in the presence of
McCann, Geraci and Harney. Hardaway gave a full confession to his
participation in the murder, completing his statement at midnight.
After his jury trial and sentencing, Hardaway appealed his conviction
to the Illinois Appellate Court. On September 10, 1999 his conviction was
affirmed in the earlier-cited published opinion and an accompanying
unpublished Rule 23 order (Ex. D).
Hardaway next filed a Petition for Leave To Appeal to the Illinois
Supreme Court (Ex. E). Leave was denied in that court's Docket No. 88421
on May 31, 2000 in the typical one-sentence order (Ex. F, reported in
table at 189 Ill.2d 668, 731 N.E.2d 767). That final disposition renders
this May 29, 2001 Petition ...