People v. Jones
| Decision Date | 12 April 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 1-86-3015,1-86-3015 |
| Parties | , 143 Ill.Dec. 581 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Earl JONES, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Cecil M. Partee, State's Atty. of Cook County, Chicago (Inge Fryklund, Geal O'Brien, Andrew LeFevour, Asst. State's Attys., of counsel), for plaintiff-appellee.
Defendant Earl Jones appeals his murder conviction in a 1985 jury trial. Following his arrest, defendant made oral and written statements to police admitting his role in the shooting of a fellow resident of his Chicago apartment building. He was subsequently indicted by a Cook County grand jury and tried on one count of murder, based on accountability. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1983, ch. 38, par. 9-1(a)(1); par. 5-2(c).) Defendant's pre-trial motions to quash his arrest and suppress his statements to police were denied. He was found guilty and sentenced to 20 years in the Department of Corrections.
On appeal, defendant raises three issues for our consideration. He contends that (1) police lacked probable cause for his warrantless arrest; (2) the trial court erred in finding that his statement to police was voluntary; and (3) the State's evidence did not establish his guilt, based on accountability, beyond a reasonable doubt. For reasons set forth below, we affirm.
At a hearing on defendant's motion to quash arrest, Chicago police Detective Paul Carroll testified that he was assigned to investigate a homicide which occurred at 1:15 a.m. on July 29, 1984, in the hallway area of 1161 North Larrabee, which is a Chicago Housing Authority building. In the course of his investigation, he learned that the victim, Robert Morrison, had been found lying outside the doorway of apartment 502 at that address. A bicycle was also found lying on the fourth floor landing of the stairwell.
Detective Carroll further testified that about 10:15 a.m. on July 30, 1984, he and Detective Anthony Graffeo interviewed Julius Perkins at an Area 6 police headquarters office. Perkins told the detectives that he was a resident of the building where the shooting took place, and had been descending the stairs at the time the shots were fired. As Perkins started downstairs from the fifth floor, he passed the victim, who was coming up the stairs with a bicycle. Then he saw, at the fourth floor level, three persons whom he recognized. He overheard these individuals talking about "offing" someone. Perkins said that he knew one of these individuals by the name of "Black Stan," and the others as "B.C." and "Earl." He told the detectives that Earl lived at apartment 805 in the building. He also said that Black Stan was holding a long-barreled gun in his hand. After continuing down the stairs, he saw B.C. fire the gun up the stairs, presumably Detective Carroll further testified that following this conversation with Perkins, he contacted a public housing office and asked them to check their records. He was informed that the name assigned to apartment 805 at 1161 North Larrabee was "Baker." Unable to locate the name, Earl Baker, in police records, Carroll went to apartment 805 at that location, where he spoke to Mattie Baker. Mrs. Baker informed him that she had a son, Earl Jones, who was then on the west side of Chicago. Checking with his office, Carroll found that there was a record of an Earl Jones at the same 1161 North Larrabee address. Soon thereafter, Carroll was notified by a fellow police officer that the person he was looking for was standing in front of 1161 North Larrabee, wearing a purple pullover shirt and blue jeans. He immediately returned with three other officers, two of them in uniform, to that location, where they observed the defendant wearing the clothing described. He further testified that defendant looked in the direction of the officers, and then "broke and ran" to the stairway of the building and up to the third floor. When Detective Carroll caught up with defendant on the third floor landing, he asked his name. Carroll recalled that defendant first replied that his name was Earl, or possibly Edwin, Baker, and then, in response to Carroll's question, said that he also went by the name Earl Jones. Carroll later stated, on cross-examination, that either he or his partner asked defendant if he lived in apartment 805, and defendant replied that he did. Carroll then placed defendant under arrest and drove him to Area 6 police headquarters.
[143 Ill.Dec. 584] at the victim. As B.C. fired, Black Stan was holding open the stairwell door and Earl was standing right next to B.C. After Perkins heard two shots, he heard these three persons running up the stairs. Then he [196 Ill.App.3d 943] heard two more shots. Detective Carroll also stated that Perkins explained why he had earlier told police a different version of the story, namely, that he had heard three shots before he reached the first floor, but saw no one exit the stairwell. Perkins said that he knew Black Stan and B.C. from the neighborhood, knew that they were gang members, and was afraid of them. Carroll testified that he knew "Black Stan" as Stanley Rankins and "B.C." as Charles Young, and that he believed Perkins as to his reason for giving the earlier account. He also stated that he offered Perkins nothing and made no promise of protection in exchange for his information.
Chicago police detective Anthony Graffeo also testified at the hearing on the motion to quash arrest. His testimony corroborated Carroll's in that he recalled being present with Carroll at the July 30, 1984, interview with Julius Perkins, and stated that Perkins had told them that the person named "Earl," whom he had seen on the stairway when the shooting took place, lived at 1161 North Larrabee, apartment 805. Detective Graffeo also stated that he later accompanied Carroll to apartment 805 at that address and spoke to defendant's mother, who told the detectives that she had a son on the west side of Chicago by the name of Earl Jones. He further recalled that Carroll then checked with his office and learned that police arrest cards listed an Earl Jones at 1161 North Larrabee. Graffeo admitted that nowhere in a police report prepared and signed by him, which summarized the July 30 conversation with Perkins, was there a statement indicating that Perkins mentioned a specific apartment number or even a floor where Earl lived. On cross-examination, Graffeo agreed that his report included a statement that Perkins told him "[h]e had lift [sic ] his apartment on the 5th Floor and was walking down the stairs when he saw Earl, whom he knows from the building he resides in."
Testifying at a later hearing on defendant's motion to suppress statements, Detective Graffeo gave an account of what transpired after Jones arrived at the police station. Graffeo stated that about 1:20 p.m., he placed a telephone call to defendant's mother, using the number which Mrs. Baker had given to police, but was unable to reach her. At about 1:30 p.m., he and Detective Carroll interviewed defendant after Graffeo read defendant's Miranda On cross-examination, Detective Graffeo stated that he and Carroll left defendant alone in the interview room between the 1:30 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. conversations. He further testified that during the second interview, he asked defendant if he wanted something to eat or drink, but Jones declined the offer. Defendant did ask to use the washroom and was allowed to do so. Graffeo also acknowledged that after 1:20 p.m., he made no further attempts to contact defendant's mother.
[143 Ill.Dec. 585] rights from a police handbook. Graffeo further stated that he asked Jones whether he understood each right as it was read to him, and that defendant answered in the affirmative. He then asked defendant whether he wished to answer questions, and defendant replied that he did. Before proceeding with the interview, which lasted about 15 minutes, Graffeo also told Jones that although he was a juvenile and under the age of 17, he would be charged as an adult if charged with murder, armed robbery with a gun, or rape. He also testified that he asked defendant whether he wished to have his parents notified, and defendant stated that he did not. About 2:30 p.m., prior to a second, 20-minute interview, Graffeo once again advised defendant of his constitutional rights, which Jones said he understood. The detective acknowledged that he did not repeat at this time the admonition about defendant being chargeable as an adult for certain crimes. Only Graffeo, Carroll, and the defendant were present for the second interview. The detective further stated that at no time during the first or the second interviews did he or anyone in his presence strike the defendant in the face. He also testified that at no time during either conversation did he exercise any mental or psychological coercion or confront Jones with any misrepresentations about the homicide.
Assistant State's Attorney George Velcich also testified at the suppression hearing. He stated that on July 30, 1984, at approximately 8:35 p.m., he interviewed defendant at Area 6 police headquarters. Detective Graffeo and Chicago Police Department Youth Officer James Riordan were also present for this interview. Velcich stated that he first informed Jones that he was a lawyer, but not his lawyer, and that he worked with the police. He then advised defendant of his Miranda rights. Velcich further testified that he told Jones that he could be charged as an adult if he were charged with murder, armed robbery, rape, or deviate sexual assault. For other crimes, he could still be charged as a juvenile. Velcich also stated that Jones never said that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Jackson, 1-06-2787.
... ... Defendant also made improvements to the home, and his fiancée, Brianne Blue, was listed as the account holder on the municipal water bill ... Later in October 2002, an advertisement was placed in a newspaper for the leasing of the South Prospect home. Carolyn Jones responded to the advertisement and met with defendant, who told Jones that he was the caretaker of the home for the owner, who was out of town. Defendant, Jones, and her husband entered into a lease for the South Prospect home entitled, "Lease with Option Purchase" under which the Jones family paid ... ...
-
People v. Horton
...Illinois, a defendant's flight from police can be considered as an additional factor in determining probable cause. People v. Jones , 196 Ill.App.3d 937, 956, 143 Ill.Dec. 581, 554 N.E.2d 516 (1990). Yet, a person's motive is not determinative by any means. See People v. Peete , 318 Ill.App......
-
People v. Ralon
... ... (In re Lamb (1975), 61 Ill.2d 383, 389, 336 N.E.2d 753; People v. Armstrong (1972), 51 Ill.2d 471, 476, 282 N.E.2d 712, 715; People v. Jones (1990), 196 Ill.App.3d 937, 958, 143 Ill.Dec. 581, 554 N.E.2d 516.) The purpose of the rule is to compel the State to produce those officers who were witnesses to, or who had a role in procuring, the making of the controverted statement. ( People v. Jones, 196 Ill.App.3d at 958-59, 143 Ill.Dec ... ...
-
People v. Horton
...suspicion of criminal activity. Illinois v. Wardlow , 528 U.S. 119, 124-25, 120 S.Ct. 673, 145 L.Ed.2d 570 (2000) ; People v. Jones , 196 Ill. App. 3d 937, 956, 143 Ill.Dec. 581, 554 N.E.2d 516 (1990). But, of equal merit, flight alone does not connote criminal activity. Jones , 196 Ill. Ap......