U.S. ex rel. Palmer v. DeRobertis, No. 83-1148

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore ESCHBACH and FLAUM, Circuit Judges, and JAMESON; JAMESON
Citation738 F.2d 168
Parties15 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1350 UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Rueben PALMER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Richard DeROBERTIS and Neil Hartigan, Respondents-Appellees.
Decision Date14 May 1984
Docket NumberNo. 83-1148

Page 168

738 F.2d 168
15 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1350
UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Rueben PALMER, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
Richard DeROBERTIS and Neil Hartigan, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 83-1148.
United States Court of Appeals,
Seventh Circuit.
Argued April 9, 1984.
Decided May 14, 1984. *

Page 169

Carol M. Rice, Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, Ill., for petitioner-appellant.

Michael E. Shabat, Cook County State's Atty., Chicago, Ill., for respondents-appellees.

Before ESCHBACH and FLAUM, Circuit Judges, and JAMESON, Senior District Judge. **

JAMESON, Senior District Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court dismissing Palmer's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254, and granting respondents' motion for summary judgment. We affirm.

Palmer was convicted in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, of armed robbery and sentenced to an 18 year term of imprisonment which he is now serving. His conviction was affirmed by the Illinois Appellate Court in an unpublished order. People v. Palmer, 98 Ill.App.3d 1201, 56 Ill.Dec. 647, 427 N.E.2d 1052 (1st Dist.1981).

On this appeal, Palmer relies primarily upon two contentions: (1) that the admission

Page 170

of evidence and prosecutorial comment concerning flight denied him a fundamentally fair trial; and (2) the prosecution's peremptory challenge of blacks denied Palmer the right to a trial by an impartial jury and equal protection of the law.

Palmer was charged with the armed robbery of Janice Fulkerson and George Brack. Both victims testified that on November 11, 1978, they were robbed at gun point by three men. Both identified Palmer as one of the robbers. They also identified him at a lineup four days after the crime. In addition to the victims, two police officers testified for the state. The defendant rested without presenting any evidence.

The facts relative to flight were well summarized in the district court's opinion:

On November 15, 1978, two Chicago Police Officers in an unmarked car observed a Cadillac automobile with the license plate bent so as to obscure the numbers. The officers attempted to curb the Cadillac, but the driver sped away, leading them on a high-speed chase. The police lost the Cadillac in traffic, but later observed it parked in front of an apartment building. Three men, including petitioner, were standing nearby. When the officers pulled up, the three men attempted to flee. Petitioner entered the apartment building and the police followed. Petitioner ran up the stairs to the sixth floor where he engaged in a shouting match with an older gentleman who had an apartment there. The police arrived on the sixth floor as this was occurring and arrested petitioner.

In addressing the claim that this evidence of flight denied Palmer a fair trial, the Illinois Appellate Court said in part:

While evidence that defendant was aware that he was a suspect is essential to prove flight, actual knowledge of his possible arrest is not necessary to render such evidence admissible where there is evidence from which such fact may be inferred. (People v. Griffin (1974), 23 Ill.App.3d 461, 318 N.E.2d 671.) In the present case, it was reasonable to conclude that defendant's flight was attributable to the armed robbery he committed four days earlier and, that in the absence of any testimony explaining his flight, it was properly admitted into evidence. (People v. Ligon (1973), 15 Ill.App.3d 746, 305 N.E.2d 212.) Moreover, if the introduction of evidence of flight was error, it was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt.

People v. Palmer, No. 80-1132 at 2.

Erroneous evidentiary rulings will not cause a writ to issue unless a specific constitutional guarantee has been violated or the error is of such magnitude that the result is a denial of fundamental fairness. Cramer v. Fahner, 683 F.2d 1376, 1385 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1016, 103 S.Ct. 376, 74 L.Ed.2d 509 (1982), and cases there cited. Moreover, where "the evidence of guilt is so strong that, even without the admission of the disputed evidence, the state proved its case ... beyond a reasonable doubt, the writ should not issue." Id.

In contending that the evidence of flight denied Palmer a fundamentally fair trial in violation of the Due Process Clause, Palmer argues that the trial judge questioned the relevance of the evidence of flight and instructed the prosecution not to go beyond the "bare circumstances of the arrest;" but notwithstanding the court's admonition the prosecutor argued the facts of the flight in detail. In particular, the trial judge found that evidence of the altercation and of guns in the car would be unduly prejudicial. The prosecutor did in fact refer in his closing argument to the "shouting and shoving match with an older gentleman," but there was no reference to the guns in the car. The trial judge denied a defense motion to strike the flight evidence. 1

Page 171

As this court noted in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 practice notes
  • Teague v. Lane, No. 84-2474
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • May 11, 1987
    ...Circuit's recent decisions in United States v. Clark [737 F.2d 679 (7th Cir.1984) ], and United States ex rel. Palmer v. DeRobertis, [738 F.2d 168 (7th Cir.1984) In Batson, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), the Supreme Court decided that "the Equal Protection Clause forbids......
  • Personal Restraint of Lord, Matter of, No. 60000-7
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • February 24, 1994
    ...may rise to the posture of the denial of fundamental fairness and due process of law. Page 335 United States ex rel. Palmer v. DeRobertis, 738 F.2d 168, 171 (7th Cir.1984) (quoting United States v. Pate, 426 F.2d 1083, 1086 (7th Cir.1970), cert. denied, sub nom. Durso v. Pate, 400 U.S. 995,......
  • US ex rel. Yates v. Hardiman, No. 84 C 10295.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • March 20, 1987
    ...See United States v. Clark, 737 F.2d 679 (7th Cir.1984) (facts failed to raise presumption of racial motivation); Palmer v. DeRobertis, 738 F.2d 168 (7th Cir.1984), cert denied, 469 U.S. 924, 105 S.Ct. 306, 83 L.Ed.2d 241 (1984) (issue waived by habeas petitioner's failure to preserve it in......
  • Richardson v. Lemke, Nos. 12–1619
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • May 15, 2014
    ...the probative value of the evidence is greatly outweighed by the prejudice to the accused. United States ex rel. Palmer v. DeRobertis, 738 F.2d 168, 171 (7th Cir.1984) (citing United States v. Pate, 426 F.2d 1083, 1086 (7th Cir.1970)). In this case it is not. First, we agree with the Illino......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
28 cases
  • Teague v. Lane, No. 84-2474
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • May 11, 1987
    ...Circuit's recent decisions in United States v. Clark [737 F.2d 679 (7th Cir.1984) ], and United States ex rel. Palmer v. DeRobertis, [738 F.2d 168 (7th Cir.1984) In Batson, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), the Supreme Court decided that "the Equal Protection Clause forbids......
  • Personal Restraint of Lord, Matter of, No. 60000-7
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • February 24, 1994
    ...may rise to the posture of the denial of fundamental fairness and due process of law. Page 335 United States ex rel. Palmer v. DeRobertis, 738 F.2d 168, 171 (7th Cir.1984) (quoting United States v. Pate, 426 F.2d 1083, 1086 (7th Cir.1970), cert. denied, sub nom. Durso v. Pate, 400 U.S. 995,......
  • US ex rel. Yates v. Hardiman, No. 84 C 10295.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois)
    • March 20, 1987
    ...See United States v. Clark, 737 F.2d 679 (7th Cir.1984) (facts failed to raise presumption of racial motivation); Palmer v. DeRobertis, 738 F.2d 168 (7th Cir.1984), cert denied, 469 U.S. 924, 105 S.Ct. 306, 83 L.Ed.2d 241 (1984) (issue waived by habeas petitioner's failure to preserve it in......
  • Richardson v. Lemke, Nos. 12–1619
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • May 15, 2014
    ...the probative value of the evidence is greatly outweighed by the prejudice to the accused. United States ex rel. Palmer v. DeRobertis, 738 F.2d 168, 171 (7th Cir.1984) (citing United States v. Pate, 426 F.2d 1083, 1086 (7th Cir.1970)). In this case it is not. First, we agree with the Illino......
  • 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