Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Jackson

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division

June 5, 2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
SHERICK JACKSON

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          JOHN ROBERT BLAKEY JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         On September 7, 2017, the Grand Jury returned an indictment against Defendant Sherick Jackson (“Defendant”), charging him with unlawful possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g) and 924(e)(1). Indictment [2].

         On November 15, 2018, Defendant moved to suppress certain incriminating statements Defendant made to law enforcement officers and any subsequently derived evidence. Defendant's Motion Suppress Confession [35]. Defendant alleges that he was detained in an alley and then “removed from the scene at the direction of police, in custodial detention, and was interrogated by the police specifically as to evidence of criminality within his vehicle” prior to being properly advised of his constitutional rights. Id. Therefore, Defendant asserts that those statements, and his later post-Miranda statements, must be suppressed under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) and Missouri v. Seibert, 542 U.S. 600 (2004).

         On December 13, 2018, this Court held an evidentiary hearing on Defendant's motion. At the hearing, Defendant presented evidence in support of his motion, including his own testimony, as well as that of three Chicago Police officers. The parties further introduced, without objection, electronic evidence captured by police body-cameras (Gov. Ex 1).

         Subsequently, the parties filed post-hearing memorandums. In his memorandum [43], Defendant concedes that “the delineation of testimony presented” in the Government's memorandum [42] “is accurate and objectively presented as to those facts” contained therein. [43] at 1. Additionally, Defendant also states that he “does not object to the initial statements made to Sgt. Losik at the scene” because the interaction was “exigent and otherwise within the proper role of the officers pursuant to an initial Terry investigation.” Id. (citing Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)). As such, this Court only considers the admissibility of Defendant's statements made after “his removal from the scene and transport to the hospital in handcuffs.” [43] at 6.[1]

         Based upon this record, including the materials submitted by the parties and the evidence presented at the hearing, this Court makes the following factual findings and draws the resulting conclusions of law.

         I. Findings of Fact

         In the early morning hours of December 9, 2016, while on routine patrol in a marked police vehicle, Chicago police officers saw a car double-parked on the street at approximately 200 North Austin Boulevard. As the officers began a registration check, the car pulled away at a high rate of speed while an occupant's feet were still hanging out of the vehicle. The officers activated their emergency equipment and pursued the car as it fled northbound on Austin Boulevard.

         During the ensuing car chase, the radio dispatcher relayed contemporaneous reports of prior gunfire in the officers' immediate vicinity. With the officers still in pursuit, the car raced eastbound onto Corcoran Place and then southbound into an alley before crashing into another parked car near 126 North Mayfield Avenue. The officers then observed both car doors open and the occupants exit the car, with two males and one female fleeing on foot. The officers gave chase, almost immediately caught the female, and detained her in the back of a police vehicle.

         Upon inspection of the now abandoned car, the officers observed bullet holes in the car, a semi-automatic 44-caliber handgun on the floorboard of the front passenger seat, and a 45-caliber semi-automatic pistol between the front passenger door and the front passenger seat. The officers reported their observations over the radio and requested back-up officers.

         As assisting officers arrived on scene, they conducted a search of the immediate area for the two males who fled from the car. One of the assisting officers, Sergeant Thomas Losik, searched the alley east of Menard Avenue where he heard Defendant yell out for help and claim that he had been shot. Sgt, Losik responded and saw Defendant leaning against a chain link fence. Sgt. Losik observed that Defendant's hand was bleeding, but he did not see any evidence of a gunshot wound. As a safety measure, Sgt. Losik handcuffed Defendant and moved him to the curb to await an ambulance. As they waited for the ambulance to arrive, Defendant made several statements to the police officers. At this point, Sgt. Losik did not know the exact nature of Defendant's criminal involvement, if any, in the Mayfield Avenue incident under investigation.

         When medical personal arrived, they transported Defendant in an ambulance to West Suburban Hospital in Oak Park, with one of his wrists possibly handcuffed to a rail. Police officers followed the ambulance in their own police vehicles. Upon instructions from Sgt. Losik, two police officers remained at the hospital and detained Defendant, so detectives could conduct a follow-up investigation.

         On his way to the hospital himself, Sgt. Losik learned from other officers that the female occupant of the vehicle had given a statement to law enforcement. She stated that she had been picked up by an individual she knew only as “Black” and another unknown male. She stated that in the car Black began acting paranoid as if he was high on drugs and told them that he believed they were being followed. She stated that Black then got out of the vehicle, looked down the ally and shot a gun. She stated that she told the driver to leave Black because he was high; and, as the driver began to pull away, Black jumped on top of the car, pointed guns at them and threatened to kill them if they tried to leave him. She stated that Black then opened fire, and a bullet hit the car near where she was sitting. She stated that as they pulled away Black jumped in the car with his feet still hanging out, and a law enforcement vehicle began its pursuit of their car.[2]

         When he arrived at the hospital, Sgt. Losik relayed this new witness information to the officers standing guard near Defendant at the hospital. From behind a curtain ten to twelve feet away, Defendant then, unprompted, stated that he was not shooting the gun at anyone, but rather he was just shooting toward the ground. Defendant called Sgt. Losik over to his bed and said that he would tell Sgt. Losik what happened; he then admitted that he had the gun but claimed he ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.