![]() ![]() The court noted that Officer Staggers had two hands moving and placed down on the seat. Officer Stagger demonstrated for the court how defendant moved when he got out of the car. Defendant complied, but as he was getting out, she saw him reach back and put something on the seat. After Rucker had been secured in the back of the squad car, she ordered defendant out of the vehicle. Officer Staggers then testified at trial and stated that defendant was the passenger in the car being driven by Rucker. Trial was immediately commenced and the court accepted Officer Staggers's testimony at the hearing by way of stipulation at trial. The trial court denied Rucker's motion to suppress statements. He admitted showing Officer Staggers a firearm owner's identification (FOID) card at the police station but denied being given his Miranda rights. He stated that he never made any statements to Officer Staggers regarding the gun at the scene and that he had denied knowing of any gun after being confronted with the gun subsequent to the search of the vehicle. Rucker testified at the hearing on the motion. Officer Staggers also conceded that she had waited until the day of trial to tell the State that Rucker made additional statements at the police station regarding where he got the gun and why he was carrying the gun. She admitted that her report did not contain the statements Rucker made at the scene or at the police station. Officer Staggers was questioned with respect to the reports she generated in this case. Rucker also told Officer Staggers that he was carrying the gun for protection and that he was showing the gun to defendant. Once at the station and after being given his Miranda rights, Rucker told Officer Staggers that he had bought the gun the previous Tuesday from a location in Dolton. card.” Staggers did not see a gun in Rucker's possession nor did she find a weapon after searching his person. Officer Staggers testified at a hearing on Rucker's motion to suppress statements 2 that after she ordered Rucker to his knees, Rucker stated “the gun is mine. Officer Staggers searched the vehicle and found a gun on the front passenger bucket seat. Both defendant and Rucker were searched and placed in the rear of the squad car. About three minutes later, defendant, the passenger, was ordered out of the vehicle. She instructed Rucker to walk toward her and to get on his knees. Officer Staggers ordered the driver, Shawn Rucker 1, out of the vehicle. While following the vehicle, Officer Staggers saw the passenger door open a “crack” while the vehicle was still moving. After activating her emergency lights, she and her partner followed the vehicle in their patrol car for approximately four blocks before the vehicle came to a stop. On August 25, 2000, at approximately 12:50 a.m., Officer Staggers of the Chicago police department observed a blue four-door vehicle go the wrong way down the one-way street. Defendant now appeals and argues: (1) the State failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (2) trial counsel was ineffective (3) trial counsel operated under a conflict of interest and (4) section 24-1.6(a)(1)(3)(A) of the aggravated unlawful use of a weapon statute is unconstitutional as it is violative of substantive due process (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1)(3)(A) (West 2000)). ![]() Devine, State's Attorney of Cook County (Renee Goldfarb, Annette Collins, and Julie Line Bailey, of counsel), for Appellee.įollowing a bench trial, defendant Jarien Grant was convicted of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1)(3)(A) (West 2000)) and sentenced to one year of imprisonment. ![]() Pelletier, Deputy Appellate Defender of the State of Illinois (Tiffany Green, Assistant Appellate Defender, of counsel), for Appellant. The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ![]() Appellate Court of Illinois,First District, Fourth Division. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |