People v. Jackson, Gen. No. 53648

CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois
Writing for the CourtLYONS; McCORMICK, P.J., and BURKE
Citation264 N.E.2d 462,130 Ill.App.2d 170
PartiesPEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frank JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Decision Date29 September 1970
Docket NumberGen. No. 53648

Page 462

264 N.E.2d 462
130 Ill.App.2d 170
PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Frank JACKSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Gen. No. 53648.
Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, Second Division.
Sept. 29, 1970.

[130 Ill.App.2d 171]

Page 463

Gerald W. Getty, Public Defender of Cook County, Chicago, for defendant-appellant; Saul H. Brauner, Norman W. Fishman, James J. Doherty, Asst. Public Defenders, of counsel.

Edward V. Hanrahan, State's Atty., County of Cook, Chicago, for plaintiff-appellee; Elmer C. Kissane, Arthur Belkind, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel.

LYONS, Justice.

The defendant, Frank Jackson, was indicted for murder. In a jury trial, he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and judgment was entered. After the defendant's written motion for a new trial was denied and a hearing in aggravation and mitigation was held, he was sentenced to fourteen to twenty years in the State Penitentiary. In this appeal the defendant contends that: (1) the trial court erred in overruling his motion to suppress his oral confessions; and (2) the minimum sentence is excessive and should be reduced.

[130 Ill.App.2d 172] Prior to trial, the defendant presented a written motion to suppress his oral confessions, given to certain police officers, on the grounds that admission of such evidence would 'violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United State Constitution and Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois.'

Testifying for the State at the hearing, before the court, on the motion to suppress were Sergeant Patrick Ward and Detectives Richard Sandberg and James Griffin, all of the Chicago Police Department. Testifying for the defendant was defendant himself, Louise Garner, Glenda Matute and Detective John Loftus of the Chicago Police Department.

Sergeant Ward stated that on June 28, 1967, at approximately 8:30 A.M., he was on duty at the bonding desk located on the first floor of Central Police Headquarters in Chicago when the defendant came in alone and told him: 'I want to give myself up; I killed my girl friend on the West side.' The defendant also stated that he was no longer armed. Ward searched him, found no weapon and directed him to sit in a chair behind the bonding desk. The accused was never handcuffed.

Continuing, Ward testified that the defendant then told him he had shot the deceased in his car while they were parked in an alley. He left her in the car and discarded the weapon in a garbage can located near his parked vehicle. This information was then verified by the Police Department. Ward stated that he then placed the defendant under arrest and gave him the Miranda warnings; namely, he had the right to remain silent; anything he said could be used against him in court; he had the right to have an attorney present during any questioning; and if he had no funds to hire an attorney, the State would obtain one for him. The defendant replied that he understood these rights.

In conclusion, Ward stated that at approximately 9 A.M. on June 28, 1967, Homicide/Sex Detectives Sandberg and Griffin arrived at Central Police Headquarters, and he told them that he had given the Miranda warnings to the defendant. The detectives then took the defendant [130 Ill.App.2d 173] from Central Police Headquarters. Ward testified that he never struck the defendant and neither he nor anyone else in his presence ever made any promises or threats.

On cross-examination, Ward denied that when the defendant approached him he said that he merely wanted to report in accident nor that he ever said later that he wanted a lawyer and would say nothing further until he talked to an attorney.

Detective Sandberg testified that when he and his partner, Detective Griffin, met Sergeant Ward at approximately 9 A.M. on June 28, 1967, at Central Police Headquarters, they also met the accused who told them in response to their questions, that Sergeant Ward had explained his constitutional rights to him. Sandberg stated that he and Griffin then took the defendant

Page 464

out to their unmarked police vehicle, never handcuffed him, and drove to the homicide scene arriving there in about fifteen minutes. Continuing, Sandberg testified that, on the way to the homicide scene, he too gave the four Miranda warnings to the defendant who replied that he understood them. The accused never asked for an attorney but rather, on the way to the West side, told Sandberg what had happened in his car earlier that morning. Sandberg was told this only after he had advised the defendant of his constitutional rights.

After arriving at the homicide scene and remaining there for about fifteen minutes, the defendant stated that he wanted to be taken to St. Leonard's House in Chicago, which is a half-way house operated by the Episcopal Church for parolees. The accused wanted to go there to pick up his bank book, his money, and to tell the people he was in trouble.

Sandberg stated that at St. Leonard's House, Detective Griffin remained in the police car while he and the defendant met a woman behind the desk on the second floor. Sandberg testified that he heard the accused tell her that he wanted his bank book and money as: 'I'm in trouble; I killed Sally.' From St. Leonard's House, they went to Area 4 Homicide. There in a room on the second floor, Sandberg testified that Griffin again gave the defendant the Miranda warnings and the [130 Ill.App.2d 174] accused responded that he understood them. Thereafter, the accused gave them a detailed oral statement of the events preceding the homicide and when he was asked if he wanted to give a written statement to an assistant State's Attorney in the presence of a court reporter, the defendant responded by saying he would first like to speak with an Episcopal minister from St. Leonard's House. The police located Reverend Robert Taylor who arrived at the police station in about twenty minutes and spoke with the accused in private. The defendant thereafter refused to say anything further until he had talked to an attorney.

The testimony of Detective Griffin was essentially a corroboration of Sandberg's testimony.

For the defense, the defendant testified that he was fifty-three years of age at time of trial and when he spoke to Sergeant Ward on June 28, 1967, he told him that he wanted to report an accident as his girl friend was in his car and she had been shot. When Ward asked him who had shot her, the defendant said he replied that he would like to talk to an attorney before he made any further statements. Ward then told him he was under arrest, searched him and asked if he had a record. The accused said he was on parole at the present time.

Continuing, the defendant stated that neither Ward nor Sandberg nor Griffin ever gave him the Miranda warnings, and he was taken to St. Leonard's House after telling Sandberg and Griffin that he wanted to go there so he could obtain his bank book and thereafter hire an attorney to defend him. While at St. Leonard's House he had a conversation with Louise Garner and Glenda Matute in the presence of both Sandberg and Griffin, but the defendant denied that he ever told either or both of the women that he had shot and killed his girl friend, Sally Strickland.

The defendant went on to testify that at Area 4 Homicide the two detectives asked him to tell them what happened that morning but he allegedly said that he wanted to talk to a lawyer first. The detectives responded that he could speak to an attorney after he gave [130 Ill.App.2d 175] them his oral statement. They called the Reverend Robert Taylor only after they had completed questioning him.

On cross-examination, the defendant stated that he had taken a bus to Central Police Headquarters and had not driven Sally Strickland to a hospital.

Louise Garner testified that she was office manager of St. Leonard's House on June 28, 1967, when she saw the defendant

Page 465

enter with two police officers. She was unable to say that Detectives Sandberg and Griffin were the two police officers who accompanied the defendant on the morning of June 28, 1967, but she did say that she asked the accused, in the presence of the police, what was the trouble and he replied: 'There's some difficulty; I have come here to get my bank book.' When she asked the defendant the nature of this difficulty, he did not reply. She then suggested that he and the two police officers go up to the second floor and obtain his bank book. She did not see them again.

Glenda Matute testified that she was a secretary at St. Leonard's House on June 28, 1967, when she saw the defendant accompanied by two police officers. She was unable, however, to identify Detectives Sandberg and Griffin as the two policemen who accompanied the accused on the date in question. She did say that she met these three people on the second floor of St. Leonard's House and when she asked the defendant what was the matter after he had asked for his bank book, he replied: 'I am in a little trouble.' When she asked the policemen what was the trouble, one of them replied that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Zisook, In re, Nos. M
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • December 4, 1981
    ...v. Weber (3d Cir. 1970), 437 F.2d 327, cert. denied (1970), 402 U.S. 932, 91 S.Ct. 1524, 28 L.Ed.2d 867; People v. Jackson (1970), 130 Ill.App.2d 170, 264 N.E.2d 462) or information supplied by a third party. It has long been recognized that the privilege extends to private papers as well a......
  • City of Chicago v. Kiger, Gen. No. 53621
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 29, 1970
    ...the other demonstrators. In light of the unusual circumstances in this case, we will not interfere with the trial court's discretion[130 Ill.App.2d 170] in imposing the maximum fine for obstructing As for the disorderly conduct charge, we are of the opinion that the maximum fine imposed was......
  • State v. Best, No. 1
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Arizona
    • June 30, 1971
    ...391 U.S. 966, 88 S.Ct. 2038, 20 L.Ed.2d 880 (1968); State v. Ferrari, 80 N.M. 714, 460 P.2d 244 (1969); People v. Jackson, Ill.App., 264 N.E.2d 462 We have thoroughly examined the record and find that the defendant's rights were fully protected, both in the receipt of evidence and in the gi......
  • People v. Jackson, No. 58630
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 19, 1973
    ...to a term of from fourteen to twenty years in the Illinois State Penitentiary. The conviction and sentence were affirmed on appeal. 130 Ill.App.2d 170, 264 N.E.2d In March, 1971, the defendant filed a Pro se post-conviction petition in which he alleged his indigence and requested the appoin......
4 cases
  • Zisook, In re, Nos. M
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • December 4, 1981
    ...v. Weber (3d Cir. 1970), 437 F.2d 327, cert. denied (1970), 402 U.S. 932, 91 S.Ct. 1524, 28 L.Ed.2d 867; People v. Jackson (1970), 130 Ill.App.2d 170, 264 N.E.2d 462) or information supplied by a third party. It has long been recognized that the privilege extends to private papers as well a......
  • City of Chicago v. Kiger, Gen. No. 53621
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • September 29, 1970
    ...the other demonstrators. In light of the unusual circumstances in this case, we will not interfere with the trial court's discretion[130 Ill.App.2d 170] in imposing the maximum fine for obstructing As for the disorderly conduct charge, we are of the opinion that the maximum fine imposed was......
  • State v. Best, No. 1
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Arizona
    • June 30, 1971
    ...391 U.S. 966, 88 S.Ct. 2038, 20 L.Ed.2d 880 (1968); State v. Ferrari, 80 N.M. 714, 460 P.2d 244 (1969); People v. Jackson, Ill.App., 264 N.E.2d 462 We have thoroughly examined the record and find that the defendant's rights were fully protected, both in the receipt of evidence and in the gi......
  • People v. Jackson, No. 58630
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • December 19, 1973
    ...to a term of from fourteen to twenty years in the Illinois State Penitentiary. The conviction and sentence were affirmed on appeal. 130 Ill.App.2d 170, 264 N.E.2d In March, 1971, the defendant filed a Pro se post-conviction petition in which he alleged his indigence and requested the appoin......

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