People v. Walls
| Decision Date | 30 September 1991 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 1-88-0920,1-88-1097,s. 1-88-0920 |
| Citation | 220 Ill.App.3d 564,581 N.E.2d 264,163 Ill.Dec. 313 |
| Parties | , 163 Ill.Dec. 313 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Johnny WALLS and Charles Byrd, Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Defendants Walls and Byrd were both charged with the murder of Beverly Hemphill (also known as Kimberly or "Nookie") and the attempted murder of Monique Hill. (Ill.Rev.Stat.1985, ch. 38, pars. 8-4, 9-1(a).) The defendants were tried together before a jury and found guilty on both charges. Walls was sentenced to consecutive terms of 35 and 15 years and Byrd was sentenced to consecutive terms of 30 and 10 years. They both appeal their convictions and sentences and this court has consolidated their appeals.
The facts of this case are tragic, not only because they tell a tale of how one young girl lost her life and another was seriously injured, but also because they reveal the stark reality of what life is like within the "Projects" of the Chicago Housing Authority. This case is but another reminder that housing for the poor in Chicago is entrenched with gangs which present a constant threat to the safety and well-being of all the residents and that awareness of the gangs and the various gang affiliations has become necessary for one's very existence.
The evidence indicates that at about 4:30 p.m. on April 3, 1986, Monique Hill, who lived at 1159 North Cleveland, an apartment building within what is known as the "Cabrini Green" housing project of the Chicago Housing Authority, decided to go with her friend, Beverly, to visit their boyfriends at 502 West Oak, near the Cabrini Green Project. To go from Hill's apartment building to the other apartment building required that the girls walk across a blacktop area known as "the field." Apparently "the field" is a sort of no-man's land located at the center of the Cabrini Green project and bordered by the apartment buildings which are "controlled" by various rival gangs active within Cabrini Green.
As the girls walked across the field, accompanied by Monique's sister Carmen, they noticed a group of approximately ten young men playing basketball. Defendants Walls and Byrd were among the group, along with Aron Buckles and Greg Fleming. Buckles, Walls and Byrd were all known to be members of the gang known as the Black Gangster Disciples and, while Monique was apparently not a member of a gang, Beverly was known to be a member of a rival gang known as the Mickey Stone Queens, a female faction of the Cobra Stones. Due to these affiliations, Buckles began to verbally attack Beverly, telling her that she had no right to walk across the field. The girls then ran the rest of the way to 502 West Oak.
After their visit, at about 8:30 p.m. that same day, Monique and Beverly left their boyfriends' apartment to return to Monique's apartment. It was dark as Monique and Beverly began the walk back across the field. For this reason Monique could not identify the person she saw step away from the building at 1119 North Cleveland and fire 5 shots in their direction. All Monique knew was that she felt "something hot" under her right eye and then realized that she had been hit and was bleeding. Beverly called out that she too had been hit and told Monique to run for help as she fell to the ground.
Monique ran toward her apartment and came upon her sister Carmen and Carmen's boyfriend Fred. They all got into a car and drove to the place where Beverly lay unconscious.. Then Carmen and Fred drove Monique and Beverly to Henrotin Hospital. Beverly, who was 15 years old at the time, died from a gunshot wound to her chest. Monique, who was also 15 years old, suffered a gunshot wound to her right cheek, which required surgery and plastic surgery. At the time of trial a two-inch scar was still visible under her right eye.
Shortly after the shooting took place, Officers Virgil Jones and Merle Brown, both assigned to the Public Housing Unit of the Chicago Police Department working within Cabrini Green, responded to a police radio message regarding shots fired at 1119 North Cleveland. They proceeded to that location and walked to the back of the building. There they had a conversation with a person who was known to the officers and who had supplied them with reliable information in the past. This unidentified informant disclosed that he had not seen the actual shooting, but that just after hearing the shots he observed Gregory Fleming and Johnny Walls run up the stairs of the building at 1117 North Cleveland. Based on this information, the officers proceeded to Fleming's apartment, number 706, in the building at 1117 North Cleveland. They were permitted entry into the residence by Fleming's mother and shown to a rear bedroom where Fleming and Walls were located.
What happened next is subject to dispute and, consequently, a more detailed accounting will be given later in this opinion. However, for the sake of brevity, let it suffice to say that there was evidence that the officers knocked at the bedroom door and that Fleming opened it, that both Fleming and Walls were in the room, undressed, with Walls lying on a small bed and their clothes lying in a heap on the floor. Officer Jones, who knew both Fleming and Walls and was aware of their gang affiliations, informed them that there had just been a shooting outside the building and that they had been seen running upstairs after the incident. Officer Jones then asked them what they knew about the shooting.
Despite the fact that both Fleming and Walls claimed that they knew nothing about the shooting, they were asked to accompany the officers to the station at 365 West Oak for further questioning. They were allowed to dress and were taken downstairs to the officers' police car, patted down for weapons and then transported to 365 West Oak, the Public Housing Unit station. They were later transported to Area 6 Violent Crimes Unit at Western and Belmont.
Throughout the night the police continued their investigation of the shooting, at the scene as well as at the hospital and at Area 6. Several possible witnesses, in addition to Walls and Fleming, were taken to Area 6 for questioning. Walls and Fleming were each interviewed, individually, around midnight and two or three times during the early morning hours. They remained at the station although they both continued to deny any knowledge of the incident. Then, around 9 o'clock the following morning, when Detective O'Brien confronted Fleming with information they had received through their investigation, Fleming informed the police that Walls had fired the gun that shot the girls.
Based upon this and other statements received from various witnesses, Walls was formally placed under arrest on the afternoon of April 4, 1986. After his arrest he made certain admissions concerning the shooting.
In the course of their investigation the police were also told that Charles Byrd gave a gun to Walls just prior to the shooting. For this reason, on April 4, 1986, Officer Dennis Davis and his partner drove to Byrd's residence and questioned him concerning the shooting. Byrd denied any involvement in the shooting, but admitted that he knew the whereabouts of the gun and accompanied the officers to his grandmother's residence, where a gun was recovered. After assisting in the retrieval of the gun, Byrd was questioned at Area 6 and then released. Byrd made additional statements to the police on April 17, 1986, but was not arrested for his role in the shooting until May 5, 1986. Subsequently, both Walls and Byrd were named in an indictment for the murder of Beverly Hemphill and the attempted murder of Monique Hill.
Prior to trial Walls filed a motion to quash his arrest and suppress the statements he made subsequent to his arrest. The motion was denied. Walls also moved for severance, citing the confrontation clause and potentially antagonistic defenses as reasons to grant the motion. The trial court, however, denied the motion and the defendants were tried jointly.
As stated earlier, both Walls and Byrd were found guilty as charged and sentenced to consecutive terms. They now appeal, both raising the following issues: (1) whether the State failed to rebut the prima facie showing that it had utilized its peremptory challenges of prospective jurors in a racially discriminatory manner, contrary to the so-called Batson rule (see Batson v. Kentucky (1986), 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69) and whether the trial judge erred by failing to assess the legitimacy of the State's asserted reasons for exercising its peremptory challenges once it found that a prima facie showing of discrimination had been made, (2) whether the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury concerning accomplice testimony, and (3) whether it was proper to have sentenced defendants to consecutive, rather than concurrent, sentences. Walls raises two additional issues: (1) whether the trial court erred by denying his motion to quash his arrest and suppress his statements, and (2) whether the trial court erred in denying his motion for severance. Since the Batson issue affects both appeals, this court will direct its opinion first to that issue.
Peremptory challenges have long been a part of Illinois and American procedural law. Typically, through the exercise of such...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Barlow, 1-93-0667
...consented to remain in a locked interrogation room while the police continued their investigation"); People v. Walls (1991), 220 Ill.App.3d 564, 579, 163 Ill.Dec. 313, 581 N.E.2d 264 (it is "difficult to believe, as the State must necessarily contend, that citizens typically agree to spend ......
-
People v. Lopez
...223; see also People v. Reynolds, 257 Ill.App.3d 792, 801, 196 Ill.Dec. 14, 629 N.E.2d 559 (1994); People v. Walls, 220 Ill.App.3d 564, 579, 163 Ill.Dec. 313, 581 N.E.2d 264 (1991); People v. Stofer, 180 Ill.App.3d 158, 166-68, 128 Ill.Dec. 682, 534 N.E.2d 1287 (1989). This is particularly ......
-
People v. Fauntleroy
...N.E.2d 326; People v. Finley (1st Dist.1991), 222 Ill.App.3d 571, 165 Ill.Dec. 97, 584 N.E.2d 276; People v. Walls (1st Dist.1991), 220 Ill.App.3d 564, 163 Ill.Dec. 313, 581 N.E.2d 264 cons.; People v. Johnson (1991), 218 Ill.App.3d 967, 161 Ill.Dec. 628, 578 N.E.2d 1274 (all applying Herna......
-
People v. Ollie
...court that this fact suggests the defendant was being treated as a witness rather than a suspect. See People v. Walls, 220 Ill.App.3d 564, 578, 163 Ill.Dec. 313, 581 N.E.2d 264 (1991)(court found it significant that defendant was accompanied to station for questioning by his friend and that......