In re K.M., 1-17-2322

Citation2019 IL App (1st) 172322,125 N.E.3d 1173,430 Ill.Dec. 155
Decision Date20 February 2019
Docket NumberNo. 1-17-2322,1-17-2322
Parties IN RE K.M., a Minor (The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee, v. K.M., a Minor Respondent-Appellant.)
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

2019 IL App (1st) 172322
125 N.E.3d 1173
430 Ill.Dec.

IN RE K.M., a Minor

(The People of the State of Illinois, Petitioner-Appellee,
K.M., a Minor Respondent-Appellant.)

No. 1-17-2322

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Third Division.

Opinion filed February 20, 2019

James E. Chadd, Patricia Mysza, and Kieran M. Wiberg, of State Appellate Defender’s Office, of Chicago, for appellant.

Kimberly M. Foxx, State’s Attorney, of Chicago (Alan J. Spellberg, Veronica Calderon Malavia, and Kathryn A. Schierl, Assistant State’s Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

JUSTICE COBBS delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

430 Ill.Dec. 158

¶ 1 Minor-respondent K.M. was adjudicated delinquent for residential burglary and sentenced to 18 months' probation. On appeal, K.M. contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress physical evidence and his custodial statement. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand.


¶ 3 On October 19, 2015, the police suspected K.M. was involved in a residential burglary and later arrested him on his porch. The State subsequently filed a three-count petition for adjudication of

125 N.E.3d 1177
430 Ill.Dec. 159

wardship and charged K.M. with (1) residential burglary, (2) burglary, and (3) theft of property with a value exceeding $ 500, including, inter alia , a television. K.M. filed a motion to quash his arrest and to suppress evidence seized as a result of an alleged illegal search. Testimony at the suppression hearing and trial was essentially the same and is summarized in relevant part below.

¶ 4 At the December 19, 2016, suppression hearing, Detective Grossman testified that the Sauk Village Police Department received an anonymous call on October 19, 2015, around 12:18 p.m. from an individual who reported seeing people enter the residence at 22438 Yates Avenue, with items, particularly a television.1 The police department opened a burglary investigation. Grossman traveled to the Yates Avenue address. Upon arrival, Grossman spoke to the first responding officer, Officer Howard. Grossman and Howard conducted a search of the area surrounding the residence including the garbage cans located on the driveway and the detached garage.2 According to Grossman, the garbage can was not covered with a lid.

¶ 5 That same afternoon, Sauk Village police received another call reporting a burglary. The caller, later identified as Frank Host, stated that he had returned home and discovered computer accessories, personal documents, and a large flat-screen television were missing. Another officer responded to the call and recorded a statement including the victim's identity and a description of the missing items.

¶ 6 After receiving notice of the call, Grossman and Howard further examined the contents of what they had observed in the garbage. According to Grossman, the garbage was full, but he could identify documents in the garbage that belonged to the victim. He further testified that he did not have to manipulate the garbage in any way to see the victim's name on the documents. The officers then returned to the garage and found items matching the description of the stolen items. They removed these items from the garage and knocked on the door of the residence. No one answered the door; however, Grossman noticed people peeking out of the window. Grossman further testified that a short time later another person arrived at the residence and then alerted the owner of the home, Africa Campbell, who arrived at the residence shortly after.3

¶ 7 Campbell identified herself, and the officers explained their presence at her house. Campbell then entered the home. She returned to the outside carrying a large flat-screen television. She also brought outside K.M. and two other individuals from inside the house. Grossman testified that they then arrested K.M. "[b]ased on the totality of the circumstances, the residential burglary report that [they] had, the description provided by the anonymous caller, and the items recovered." At no point did the officers obtain a search warrant or an arrest warrant.

¶ 8 Officer Howard testified that at approximately 12:14 p.m. on October 19, 2015, he responded to a dispatch call that took him to 22438 Yates. Upon arrival, he waited for backup. It was relayed to him that that the officers on the scene were to

125 N.E.3d 1178
430 Ill.Dec. 160

search for individuals.4 In the process of their search they received another call from dispatch about a man reporting a burglary. Officer Howard's sergeant spoke with Frank Host, the victim of the burglary, and determined that the items taken were documents including a passport, bank statements, a black television, a black laptop, and a black external hard drive. With this new information, Howard and the other officers walked up the driveway toward the back and the side of the residence. Howard saw a garbage can with a black box on top of the garbage can. He opened the black box and found the victim's passport and documents with the victim's address inside the black box.

¶ 9 After searching the garbage can, Howard went to the detached garage and entered through an open side door. Once inside, he spotted a black laptop with an external hard drive in the rafters of the garage. He retrieved the laptop and the hard drive before attempting to make contact with the people inside the residence. Howard did not recall how contact was attempted but further testified that the woman who occupied the residence eventually made contact with the officers. Grossman then relayed "the case status and what was going on" to the woman. She responded by going inside the front door of the residence. Howard and the officers stayed outside and never went into Campbell's home.

¶ 10 Howard testified that Campbell reappeared holding a large flat-screen television, which she turned over to the officers. The television matched Host's description of his missing television. Howard made an in-court identification of K.M. and further testified that K.M. matched the description of the possible burglars of the victim's home. On cross-examination, Howard testified that while searching the garbage and the garage he did not see anyone enter or leave the residence.

¶ 11 Campbell testified as follows. She is K.M.'s mother, and on October 19, 2015, she lived at 22438 Yates. She lived with her brother, six children, and her niece. Her yard was fully enclosed by a fence, including the garage and the area next to the driveway where her garbage cans are located. When the police first arrived at her home, she was in South Holland that morning with her friend. Grossman spoke with her over the phone, and he stated that there were burglary suspects inside of her home and told her to come home in 10 to 15 minutes or else he would kick in her door. When she arrived, she spoke with the officers outside of her home but she denied giving the officers consent to search her property.

¶ 12 At the conclusion of the hearing, the motion to suppress was allowed in part and denied in part. The court stated:

"So as to the portion as to the garbage can and what was seen in the garage I'll grant your motion to suppress that evidence; however, we have the officer testifying that the mother comes home, they tell her what happened, she goes in the house, she brings out a TV, and then subsequently she brings out the minor. That part of the motion will not be suppressed. I'll allow that evidence as to the TV and the arrest of the minor."

¶ 13 On February 10, 2017, K.M. filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's ruling on his motion to suppress. The State agreed with the court's prior ruling that the evidence from the garbage can and the garage were properly suppressed. K.M.'s counsel argued that K.M.'s mother had been threatened and coerced by the police

125 N.E.3d 1179
430 Ill.Dec. 161

and therefore the television and K.M's subsequent arrest must also be suppressed. The trial court denied K.M.'s motion.

¶ 14 The testimony at trial was consistent with the testimony at the suppression hearing.5 At trial, Grossman further testified that, after K.M.'s arrest, he spoke with K.M. at the police station. Grossman presented K.M. with a preprinted form containing Miranda warnings (see Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966) ). He read K.M. his Miranda warnings and observed K.M. sign the form. K.M. agreed to speak with Grossman and told him that he entered Host's house and took property.

¶ 15 The trial court adjudicated K.M. delinquent based on the residential burglary and theft charges. K.M. subsequently filed a motion "to reconsider adjudicatory findings" and for a new trial. The trial court denied K.M.'s motion for a new trial but vacated the finding of delinquency based on the theft charge. Thus, K.M. was adjudicated delinquent based on the residential burglary charge and sentenced to 18 months' probation. This appeal followed.



To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • People v. Craine
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 26 Marzo 2020
    ...the discovery of the evidence is sufficiently attenuated from unconstitutional conduct. In re K.M. , 2019 IL App (1st) 172322, ¶ 37, 430 Ill.Dec. 155, 125 N.E.3d 1173 (citing Brown v. Illinois , 422 U.S. 590, 95 S.Ct. 2254, 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975) ). The three factors are the " ‘temporal prox......
  • People v. Schreiner
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 21 Abril 2021
    ...of that evidence but to give the State the opportunity to argue attenuation. See In re K.M. , 2019 IL App (1st) 172322, ¶¶ 50-53, 430 Ill.Dec. 155, 125 N.E.3d 1173 ; People v. Ollie , 333 Ill. App. 3d 971, 993-94, 267 Ill.Dec. 726, 777 N.E.2d 529 (2002) ; People v. Wallace , 299 Ill. App. 3......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT