United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
ROBERT BLAKEY JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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).
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 . 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).
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).
the parties filed post-hearing memorandums. In his memorandum
, Defendant concedes that “the delineation of
testimony presented” in the Government's memorandum
 “is accurate and objectively presented as to those
facts” contained therein.  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.”  at
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.
Findings of Fact
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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 ...