295 F.2d 699 (7th Cir. 1961), 13287, United States ex rel. Crump v. Sain

Docket Nº:13287.
Citation:295 F.2d 699
Party Name:UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Paul CRUMP, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Frank G. SAIN, Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois, Respondent-Appellee.
Case Date:October 16, 1961
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 699

295 F.2d 699 (7th Cir. 1961)

UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Paul CRUMP, Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

Frank G. SAIN, Sheriff of Cook County, Illinois, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 13287.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

October 16, 1961

Rehearing Denied Nov. 14, 1961.

George N. Leighton, Bernard H. Sokol, Chicago, Ill., for appellant.

Daniel P. Ward, State's Atty., Edward J. Hladis, Asst. State's Atty., Chicago, Ill., for appellee.

Before HASTINGS, Chief Judge, and DUFFY and SCHNACKENBERG, Circuit judges.

SCHNACKENBERG, Circuit Judge.

After reversal and remandment for proceedings consistent with our opinion of March 20, 1959, United States ex rel. Crump v. Sain, Sheriff, 264 F.2d 424, the district court permitted relator Paul Crump to file an amended petition, which Frank G. Sain, sheriff of Cook County, Illinois, respondent, answered. That answer included the production of the entire record of the Supreme Court of Illinois in causes Nos. 33334 and 34225, adjudicating the contentions of relator, and reported in People v. Crump, 5 Ill.2d 251, 125 N.E.2d 615, 52 A.L.R.2d 834, and 12 Ill.2d 402, 147 N.E.2d 76, respectively. A hearing was had, during which the district court heard the testimony of relator and William P. Gerber, his attorney.

The court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law, and dismissed the petition. The court found specifically that reator's confession was given 'freely and voluntarily.' Relator appealed.

The record shows what we now relate.

On March 20, 1953, a guard in a stockyards plant was killed during a robbery. The same day, Chicago police officers arrested relator and he was questioned for three days and then was released, through the efforts of his lawyer, attorney William Gerber of the Illinois bar. On March 26, 1953, ten police officers went to relator's home and arrested him without a warrant. He was taken to the criminal court building in Chicago. A stop was made at a restaurant where coffee and a doughnut were purchased for relator. He appeared in a 'lineup' that morning, was questioned by an assistant state's attorney and remained overnight at a police station.

On the morning of March 27, he was returned to the criminal court building, and was again questioned with another

Page 700

suspect, Eugene Taylor. Although Taylor admitted some part in the robbery, relator denied any implication. About noon, relator was in the office of first assistant state's attorney Richard Austin. Relator told Austin that he wanted to confer with his lawyer, Gerber, who was known to Austin. After the latter called Gerber's office, he told relator that Gerber was on his way. They waited in the office alone until Gerber's arrival, whereupon Austin left his office to Gerber and relator for about an hour and a half for a conference. Gerber had handled some legal matters for relator's family, and he represented relator in the first trial of this case.

Both upon his motion to suppress and upon the second trial of his case, relator testified that, after his private meeting with Gerber in Austin's office, relator summarized in the presence of Austin and two or three police officers, his attorney's advice to him on that occasion, as follows:

'Well, they came into the room, and Mr. Gerber addressed me in front of those men I have named. And he told them, 'Now, Dick, you hear this. I am advising my client not to say anything to anyone except upon my advice.' And he told me, he says, 'Paul, and if anyone asks you for a match, you tell them you can't give it to them unless you have the advice of your counsel.' He said, 'Do you understand?' I said, 'Yes, sir.' And he asked Mr. Austin and the rest of them did they understand it. They said, yes. Then he walked out.'

...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP