People v. Sellars

• Decision Date: 27 February 1981
• Docket Number: No. 79-835,79-835
• Citation: 49 Ill.Dec. 187,417 N.E.2d 877,93 Ill.App.3d 744
• Parties: , 49 Ill.Dec. 187 PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James SELLARS, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 877

417 N.E.2d 877

93 Ill.App.3d 744, 49 Ill.Dec. 187

PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James SELLARS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 79-835.

Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District.

Feb. 27, 1981.

Mary Robinson, Deputy State Appellate Defender, Manuel Serritos, Asst. State Appellate Defender, Elgin, for plaintiff-appellee.

J. Michael Fitzsimmons, State's Atty., Wheaton, Phyllis J. Perko, William L. Browers, State's Attys. Appellate Service Commission, Elgin, Gary J. Anderson, Deputy Director, State's Attys. Appellate Service Commission, Springfield, for defendant-appellant.

NASH, Justice:

After stipulated bench trials defendant, James E. Sellars, was found guilty of the burglaries of the Naperville Pizza Hut and Dooley's Meat Market and was sentenced to concurrent terms of three years imprisonment for each burglary.

On appeal defendant contends (1) that an illegal search of his apartment by third parties acting as agents of the police require suppression of items seized therein and defendant's subsequent confession; and (2) that his confession was involuntary as induced by promises of leniency by the police.

At the pre-trial hearing of the motion to suppress his confession defendant testified that his apartment in Aurora had been burglarized in early March 1978 and a calculator and radio taken from it. He stated that on March 15 two Naperville police officers approached him at a gas station in Naperville and Officer James Paulitz informed defendant he had acquired a calculator and radio which had been taken from defendant's apartment by "his people". Defendant testified the officer told him they would like to have him come down to the police station and talk to them and that they would make it easy on him if he would do so and would get a warrant if he would not. According to defendant they also advised him they would talk to the State's Attorney about getting a low bond and would try to get a low sentence. Defendant drove his car to the station meeting the officers and remained there talking to them until about 10 p. m. when he left to pick up a friend at work. He was not told he was arrested nor was he placed in a cell. Defendant was ultimately arrested for these burglaries on April 9.

Defendant further testified that while in the police station he was questioned by Officer Paulitz and another officer who informed him they had the calculator and radio from his apartment with his fingerprints on them, that these items had been taken in burglaries and received by the police from the people who had entered defendant's apartment. Defendant stated he repeatedly told the officers he did not wish to make a statement about certain burglaries of which they inquired and they again said they would get an arrest warrant if he did not cooperate but would talk to the State's Attorney about getting the charge reduced and a low bond if he did cooperate. Defendant testified he then admitted committing eight or nine burglaries because of the promises made by the officers and the fact they had the property which had been recovered from defendant's apartment. He also testified he subsequently learned that Harry Lauder, Edward Domick and Richard Burton had broken into his apartment, stolen the articles and turned them over to the police. Lauder had previously lived with defendant in that apartment.

On cross-examination defendant testified that the officers had informed him of his Miranda rights both at the gas station and at the police station, that he understood them and that after giving his statement he had signed a rights waiver form and another document giving the officers permission to search his apartment.

Officer Paulitz also testified at the hearing stating that on February 29, 1978, Harry Lauder and Richard Burton approached him on the street and asked whether he had picked up defendant for the burglary of Dooley's Meat Market. Lauder informed the officer that defendant had told him he had committed that offense and had a radio from Dooley's in his apartment. Paulitz then told Lauder that if he did see the radio in the apartment "to let me know, to tell me and that I could attempt to get a search warrant for the apartment to obtain the radio". Paulitz stated he did not instruct Lauder or the others to break into defendant's apartment. Officer Paulitz testified further that about five hours after his conversation with the men they appeared at the police station with the radio from the Dooley Meat Market and a calculator from another burglary. Paulitz told them he had to know how they acquired these articles, and Lauder said he and the others had broken into Sellars' apartment by jimmying the lock.

Officer Paulitz further testified that two weeks later on March 15, he and his partner, Officer Thomas McQueen, approached defendant who was sitting in a car at a gas station. He informed defendant his name had been mentioned in a burglary investigation and advised him of his Miranda rights. Paulitz told defendant he was not under arrest but asked if he would come to the police station to talk about the burglary. Paulitz denied mentioning at the gas station that Lauder had brought the radio to him, that he could get a warrant for defendant or that he would talk to the State's Attorney about reducing charges against him. He stated that he and Officer McQueen then met defendant at the police station at about 9:15 p. m., and they again informed him of his Miranda rights which defendant said he understood. Defendant told the officers at that time he had to leave by 10 p. m. and was informed he was not under arrest and could leave any time he wished.

Paulitz stated he informed defendant that if he cooperated he would speak to the State's Attorney and the judge and try to get a low bond, but that it was up to the judge. The interview lasted for about 45 minutes during which time defendant answered all questions asked of him, was not abused and at no time did he indicate he wished to terminate the discussion. Defendant also told the officers there was an item from another burglary in his apartment and gave them written permission to search it. Paulitz identified defendant's written inculpatory statement and consent to search which had been signed by Sellars.

On cross-examination Paulitz stated that he had not personally filed charges for burglary against the three men after they had informed him of their entry of defendant's apartment. He also stated that he had informed defendant that he (Paulitz) would tell the State's Attorney that defendant was cooperating in order to get defendant to talk to him and that he also informed defendant that it was up to the State's Attorney to reduce charges. Paulitz did go before Judge Norgle who had previously placed defendant on probation and requested a low bond because Sellars had cooperated with the police and he also so informed the State's Attorney.

Officer Thomas McQueen was called to testify and corroborated Paulitz' testimony that defendant had been informed of his rights and had expressed no reluctance in talking about the burglaries he had committed. McQueen could not recall any discussion relating to the lowering of defendant's bond or that Paulitz would talk to the State's Attorney, but he was present later when Paulitz did speak to the assistant State's Attorney about setting a low bond for defendant. McQueen was not present when Lauder and the other two men returned with the articles from Sellars' apartment.

After hearing arguments the trial court denied defendant's motion to suppress finding that the burglary of defendant's apartment was not by direction of the police and that his confession was voluntary. At a later date, defendant was permitted to renew his motion on the grounds that a new witness, Harry Lauder, who was not available at the earlier hearing, could be called to testify. At this hearing Lauder testified that he, Domick, Burton and Ann Vogel broke into Sellars' apartment in Aurora, removed a radio and calculator and took them to the Naperville police station. He stated that Officer Paulitz had previously asked if they could get any evidence or if they knew of any way the officers could get a search warrant for defendant's apartment. The officers had asked if these men would go to the apartment and find the stolen articles while defendant was there to aid them in getting a search warrant. Lauder informed the officers he didn't think they would be invited over and thought the only way was by breaking in. The officers said they couldn't tell him to do that and rather they go over there and see the articles so that the officers could get a search warrant.

Lauder also testified Paulitz did not tell him to break into the apartment, that he should be invited, see the articles and return to the police so they could get a search warrant. He further stated the police said they would try to find a way to help them if he helped them but was not able to recall if he had any reason to cooperate with the police. He stated, however, he may have had a charge pending against him at that time.

The trial court again denied defendant's motion to suppress finding that the search of defendant's apartment was not an act of the police who had only told these men they might get evidence for a search warrant while in the defendant's apartment at his invitation. The court also found that no direction had been given by the officers for an illegal entry, they were not present when it occurred and did not intend that it should occur. The court concluded that as the police did not participate in the illegal search of defendant's apartment his confession was not acquired as a result of it. The court further found that defendant's confession was voluntary.

We consider first whether the search of defendant's apartment violated his fourth amendment rights requiring suppression of the evidence seized therein and also his confession as resulting...