People v. Case

Decision Date30 July 1991
Docket NumberNo. 1-88-2818,1-88-2818
Citation577 N.E.2d 1291,218 Ill.App.3d 146
Parties, 160 Ill.Dec. 720 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John CASE, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Rehearing Denied Sept. 16, 1991.

Randolph N. Stone, Public Defender of Cook County (James N. Perlman, Asst. Public Defender, of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

Jack O'Malley, State's Atty. of Cook County (Renee Goldfarb, James E. Fitzgerald, Steven M. Mondry, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.

Justice COCCIA delivered the opinion of the court:

Defendant John Case and a codefendant were indicted for the January 31, 1987 murder of Cheryl Cloud and the related charges of: aggravated sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual abuse, sexual assault, unlawful restraint and, finally, concealment of a homicide. Both defendants moved to suppress inculpatory statements made while in police custody. After a joint suppression hearing, the court denied both defendants' motions. The cases were severed for trial. Defendant's statements of February 7, 1987, oral and written, were admitted into evidence at his trial.

On August 5, 1988, the jury acquitted defendant of all charges except aggravated criminal sexual abuse. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 38, par. 12-16(a)(2).) Defendant was sentenced on September 6, 1988, to an extended term of 14 years' imprisonment. The trial court denied defendant's post-trial motion and entered judgment on the jury verdict. On September 16, 1988, defendant filed his notice of appeal.

Defendant's sole issue on appeal is that his oral and written confessions were coerced by a beating he allegedly received from a detective while in police custody. He contends that his conviction should be reversed under People v. Wilson (1987), 116 Ill.2d 29, 106 Ill.Dec. 771, 506 N.E.2d 571.

I.

In the early morning hours of January 31, 1987, defendant, his girl friend, Georgianna Starr, codefendant Thomas Smith and the deceased, Cheryl Cloud, were drinking wine together while gathered in an alley located near Magnolia Street in Chicago. According to Starr's trial testimony, an argument developed between her and defendant and they started fighting. Defendant knocked Starr to the ground and she pulled him down with her where they continued to struggle.

Cheryl Cloud intervened. She punched defendant and told him to stop hitting Starr, as he was always hitting her. Starr told defendant that she would tell her brother, Phillip Starr, that defendant was beating her again. About a week earlier Phillip Starr had beaten defendant and told him to stop hitting his sister. When Cheryl Cloud hit defendant he started hitting her back and Georgianna Starr got up and left, going home to an abandoned building where she and defendant lived. Later that morning defendant woke her up while getting into bed; he said he had been to the bathroom but Starr believed he had been out all night.

Sometime between 2:00 and 3:00 p.m. on January 31, 1987, the half-nude, badly battered body of Cheryl Cloud was found behind an abandoned building in Chicago. The body was clutching three strands of long black hair in one hand and had three distinct bite marks on the right facial cheek, left breast, and right breast nipple. There were extensive external injuries to the face, head, neck, eyes, breasts, back and buttocks. There was bleeding found beneath her scalp and over the surface of her brain. There were multiple abrasions to her vagina and rectum, both of which reflected the presence of semen. The cause of death was strangulation.

Testimony at the pretrial suppression hearing revealed that on Friday, February 6, 1987, at about 9:00 p.m., defendant and Georgianna Starr were located by "Area Six" Detectives Sobolewski and Thezan. They accompanied the detectives to the police station. There they were placed in separate rooms for questioning. Defendant appeared to have been drinking; his eyes were glassy, his speech was slurred. Upon arriving at the station defendant was interviewed and denied any knowledge of the Cloud homicide. He said he had been injured in a fight with Phillip Starr, Georgianna Starr's brother, about a week or four days earlier.

Because the circumstances suggested that Cloud had died in a struggle and may have injured her attacker, the detectives noted a bruise and cuts on defendant's right hand, his swollen nose, and scratches on his forehead. At trial, Detective Sobolewski testified that defendant also had bruises on his face. In addition, the detectives noticed that defendant had long, black hair and unusually uneven teeth, and braces. As a result, the detectives sought a forensic odontologist to take impressions of defendant's teeth, and a forensic technician to take samples of defendant's hair, for purposes of comparison with the three strands of hair found in Cloud's hand and the photographs of the bite marks on Cloud's body. Defendant signed forms consenting to these procedures.

Prior to a second interview, defendant was given Miranda warnings (Miranda v. Arizona (1966), 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694), and again denied knowing anything about the Cloud homicide. He said he had been drinking with male friends that evening, not with Georgianna Starr. However, Starr told the detectives that she was with defendant that evening but that they had not seen Cheryl Cloud after midnight.

At about 11:00 p.m. on February 6, after defendant signed the consent to search forms, samples of defendant's hair and photographs of his face and hands were made. Photographs of defendant's mouth and impressions of defendant's teeth and braces were taken by the odontologist, who informed the detectives of his tentative opinion that defendant's teeth matched the bite marks on Cheryl Cloud. He said that additional observations would be made at the lab and they would be contacted the next day. Defendant then surrendered his clothes for examination and was given a paper jump suit to wear.

At about midnight, defendant was interviewed a third time. He again denied involvement in the Cloud homicide. He was then allowed to use the bathroom and was handcuffed to a ring in the wall of the interview room for the night. Detective Sobolewski said that when he left between 1:00 and 2:00 a.m., he saw defendant asleep in the interview room.

Detective Wick, at about 5:00 a.m. on February 7, 1987, saw defendant asleep in a chair in the interview room. At 9:30 a.m., Detective Thiel checked on defendant. Thiel asked defendant if he needed to use the bathroom or wanted anything to eat, but defendant said he did not need anything. At 11:00 a.m., Wick checked on defendant and received the reply that defendant did not feel like eating.

Defendant testified that he lived mostly on the streets. Defendant was confused as to exactly when on February 6 he came into police custody. He thought he had been in custody about four hours when, after impressions of his teeth were taken, he was arrested and handcuffed to the wall. In his brief, defendant estimates that these events occurred at approximately 1:00 a.m. on February 7.

In any event, according to defendant, while he was being handcuffed to the wall he requested counsel. In response, a detective with a bushy mustache, later identified as Detective Thiel, hit him several times in the kidneys. According to defendant, over the next 14 hours Thiel beat him several times because he denied involvement in the homicide. Thiel is alleged to have struck defendant three times in the face with the back of his hand. On one occasion Thiel allegedly punched defendant in the left ribs about ten times, knocking defendant out of the chair even though he was still handcuffed to the wall. Defendant demonstrated this position as having his left hand in the air and being punched in the left side.

On another occasion Thiel allegedly kicked defendant in the side, kicked him in the leg, and threatened or attempted to kick him in the testicles by placing his foot against defendant and pushing hard. In addition, defendant testified that Thiel told him details of the offense in an effort to construct defendant's confession. At one point Thiel allegedly had defendant identify codefendant Smith. When Smith called defendant a liar, Thiel allegedly kicked Smith in the chest and told him to shut up.

Finally, defendant was interviewed by an assistant State's Attorney who told him that he was working with the police. Defendant testified that he signed a statement for the attorney because he thought he would be beaten some more if he did not sign. Defendant was then taken through intake at Cermak Hospital and placed in the jail. Defendant stated that he only received food after the assistant State's Attorney's questioning ended.

On cross-examination defendant described being beaten by Phillip Starr, brother of Georgianna. He said he was knocked to the ground and that the fight happened four days before his arrest. He said Starr pulled his hair and tried to cut his wrists with a razor. Defendant hurt his hand in this fight. Defendant admitted that he drank heavily and that three years earlier he had fallen while drunk and broke his jaw. Defendant stated that he slept in an abandoned building.

At 1:30 p.m. on February 7, 1987, the detectives on duty, Wick, Blomstrand and Thiel, were notified that the hair samples from defendant were consistent with the hair found with the body. Shortly afterward they learned that the dental impressions from defendant's teeth were consistent with the photographs of the bite marks on the body. At about 2:00 p.m. defendant was interviewed and allegedly stated: "Okay. I'll tell you the truth," and made an oral confession implicating himself and the codefendant, Thomas Smith, in the Cheryl Cloud homicide. At about 3:30 and 4:30 p.m. on February 7, the detectives checked on defendant, and brought him a sandwich,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • People v. Henderson
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • January 25, 1996
    ...1986, an interpretation which weighs against defendant's allegations of police misconduct. (See, e.g., People v. Case (1991), 218 Ill.App.3d 146, 156, 160 Ill.Dec. 720, 577 N.E.2d 1291 (failure to complain of injuries at prison intake examination evidence that defendant was not injured whil......
  • People v. Richardson
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • September 24, 2009
    ...standard to be inadequate and replaces it with the clear and convincing evidence standard. See People v. Case, 218 Ill.App.3d 146, 155, 160 Ill.Dec. 720, 577 N.E.2d 1291 (1991). It must be remembered that a standard of proof is concerned only with the quantum and quality of evidence that a ......
  • People v. Pertz
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 26, 1993
    ...trial court's duty to resolve conflicting evidence and to determine the credibility of the witnesses. (People v. Case (1991), 218 Ill.App.3d 146, 154, 160 Ill.Dec. 720, 577 N.E.2d 1291.) This court is required to defer to the findings of the trial court where that court has assessed credibi......
  • People v. Kolichman
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • July 30, 1991
    ... ... at 294, 430 N.E.2d at 236.) ...         We think People v. Rossi reached the correct result and applies to the case at bar. See also United States v. Gay (10th Cir.1985), 774 F.2d 368 ...         We note that other jurisdictions have found probable cause to arrest supports a valid search when faced with similar facts, i.e., where probable cause to make an arrest for disorderly conduct exists, a ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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