Chicago Police Officer Kills Teen and Grandmother
The family of a dead Chicago teen are suing the Chicago Police Department for wrongful death and the commission of a hate crime, according to Reuters. The victim, Quintonio LeGrier, died on December 26, 2015, after Chicago Police Officer Robert Rialmo shot him. Officer Rialmo also accidentally killed 55-year-old Bettie Jones during the confrontation. LeGrier was 19 years old. Officer Rialmo Text Conversations Included Racial Language The family argues that Officer Rialmo had a racial motive in killing LeGrier. Quintonio LeGrier and Bettie Jones were both African American. The lawsuit alleges that before the shooting, Officer Rialmo exchanged texts with other officers that included racist language. The family is seeking damages under Illinois’ hate crime act, The Chicago Tribune reports. Rialmo’s lawyer argues that other officers used racist terms in the text messages, but that Rialmo did not. Rialmo also argues that LeGrier attacked him with a baseball bat, and that the use of lethal force was necessary under the circumstances. The lawyer characterized the racial terms in the text messages as “hip-hop language.” In addition, Rialmo is counter-suing the city for failing to properly train him on how to de-escalate violent confrontations with mentally ill persons. According to Rialmo, the shooting occurred after he responded to a call about domestic violence. Jones answered the door and pointed Rialmo toward an apartment. Then, LeGrier appeared in the doorway wielding a baseball bat. Rialmo fired his gun at LeGrier three or four times, killing LeGrier. He then discovered that Jones had received fatal wounds as well. Illinois Law Punishes Hate-motivated Crime Although numerous wrongful death lawsuits are ongoing in relation to police shootings across the country, the inclusion of a hate crime claim is unusual. The Illinois Criminal Code defines a hate crime as an assault, battery or criminal trespass, property damage, or harassment committed because of a person’s race, color, religion, religion, ancestry, gender, sexual orientation, or physical or mental disability. These are criminal laws. But to sue someone, there must be a civil law basis. The Illinois Code also provides that anyone suffering from a hate crime may bring a lawsuit against the person responsible if there has been physical damage to someone’s health or property. It provides that the victim can receive actual damages (money to compensate them for their injuries) as well as punitive damages (additional awards designed to discourage other potential offenders in the future). LeGrier Shooting May Be a Hate Crime In a lawsuit like the one against Officer Rialmo and the Chicago Police Department, it’s possible that the victim’s family could convince the court that the officer committed a hate crime. Because Officer Rialmo aimed a gun at LeGrier, the victims may argue that the officer committed an assault (threatening action) and battery (contact that causes an injury) against LeGrier. The more difficult questions is whether the officer had a racial motive in shooting LeGrier. This may depend on whether the jury believes that Rialmo had racist views based on evidence like his text message conversations with other officers. The court would also need to decide whether any racist views Rialmo held led to his decision to shoot LeGrier. Rialmo will likely argue that his real motive for shooting LeGrier was not the color of LeGrier’s skin, but the perceived threat of LeGrier hitting Rialmo with a baseball bat. If the court concludes that racism motivated LeGrier’s death, then the surviving family may receive both money to compensate them for the value of LeGrier’s life plus additional damages to discourage other possible offenders. Contact a Chicago Civil Rights Lawyer If you have been the victim of police misconduct, you will need expert help. Get in contact with an experienced civil rights lawyer at Barney Hourihane today to get the compensation you deserve. See Related Blog Posts Under Illinois law, a police officer has the authority to search your car during a routine traffic stop if the officer smells marijuana coming from inside. Illinois continues to follow the United States Supreme Court’s analysis under the Fourth Amendment to the United State’s Constitution that the scent of marijuana provides an officer with probable cause to search the car. Other states, such as Massachusetts, where possession of marijuana weighing less than an ounce is not a crime, offer those caught with a small amount of marijuana some protection from criminal prosecution and prevent an officer from searching your car if they only smell marijuana.
Possession is 9/10th of the law In Illinois, possession of a perceptible amount of marijuana, or cannabis, is a crime. Therefore, a police officer who smells cannabis coming from a car has the legal authority, known as probable cause, to search the car, and even the person, to find the source of the smell. Police officers have the authority to search your car--which includes any place where cannabis may be concealed--you, your possessions, and even your passengers. They can even make you take your shoes off. At least one Illinois Appeals Court considered police action reasonable after they ordered a passenger in a car remove his shoes when they smelled cannabis during a routine traffic stop. It does not have to be a strong odor. Even testimony of a faint odor perceived by an officer trained in drug interdiction will be sufficient to provide probable cause. According to the United States Supreme Court, reasonableness is the “touchstone of the Fourth Amendment.” In other words, if the police act “reasonably” then whatever they seize from you or your car is admissible against you in court. Of course, the prosecution continues to have the burden of proving you actually or constructively possessed the cannabis beyond a reasonable doubt for a judge or jury to find you guilty. What is Unreasonable? If the police acted unreasonably, then the evidence seized must be suppressed. Although the law is heavily in favor of the prosecution in these cases, the defendant still has a chance to get the evidence against him suppressed. Illinois courts will suppress evidence when the police make a mistake that violates a defendant’s constitutional rights. A common mistake police make is extending a car stop longer than necessary for police to investigate the violation of the law that authorized the car stop in the first place. So, if police stop you to give you a citation because your taillight is out, the police cannot prevent you from leaving once they have cited you for the infraction. In other words, the police cannot hang on to your license after the citation is written so they can have a drug-sniffing dog come to the scene to further investigate. If they do, whatever the police seized must be suppressed. What happens if you are charged with cannabis possession? You should contact a lawyer who is experienced in criminal defense immediately. Failing to do so could hurt your case. If an officer seizes cannabis from you or your car at a traffic stop contact our team at Barney & Hourihane to protect your civil rights. Like most people, you’ve probably made a few mistakes in your past. Maybe you were charged with a relatively minor crime and given court supervision instead of a “conviction,” an incredibly common occurrence. You might believe that these events from years ago won’t come back to haunt you, but that may not be the case. Past arrests, even if they did not result in convictions or formal charges, remain on your record and visible to potential employers unless you actively seek to have them removed. This misconception can have lasting impacts on your life, ranging from lost employment opportunities to an inability to receive financial aid. The only way to ensure that a record, however minor, does not affect you indefinitely is to petition the Court to expunge or seal your record under Section 5.2 of the Criminal Identification Act.
What is the difference between expunging and sealing a record? Expungement means that your arrest record is officially removed from the files of the arresting authority (i.e. the police) and your record will no longer appear on background checks. If you have ever been convicted of a criminal offense, you cannot expunge your record, but you may still be able to seal your record. Sealing makes your criminal record invisible from most of the public. Law enforcement agencies can still see sealed records, and employers required by law to conduct background checks (such as hospitals or schools) can still see sealed felony convictions, but they cannot see sealed misdemeanor convictions or any cases not resulting in convictions. What kinds of offenses can be expunged or sealed? Expungement is available when the final outcome of your case was something other than a conviction. This includes arrests where no charges were filed, charges that were dismissed, acquittals, findings of not guilty, and most cases where you received court supervision. Certain first-time offender drug probation offenses are also eligible for expungement. Criminal convictions, DUI offenses, and certain sexual offenses are not eligible for expungement, even if the offenses resulted in court supervision. If your record is not eligible for expungement, it may still be sealed in certain situations depending on the offense and outcome of your case. Most felony convictions cannot be sealed, with a few exceptions. Many misdemeanor offenses can be sealed, but several misdemeanor convictions cannot be sealed, including DUI convictions and crimes of violence such as Domestic Battery and Criminal Sexual Abuse. As of January 1, 2013, a new amendment to Illinois law introduced the Offender Initiative Program to make it easier for non-violent offenders to expunge their records and get back into the workforce. This amendment allows felony convictions for certain non-violent offenses, including retail theft and possession of a controlled substance, to be removed from your record after successful completion of the program. If you have been convicted of a non-violent felony offense, this new program may be your best bet for clearing your record and moving on with your life. Do I still have to disclose arrests and convictions on a job application if my record is expunged? No. If you successfully expunge or seal your record, your arrests and convictions are no longer part of the public record and you no longer need to disclose them. How do I know my records are eligible for record-sealing or expungement? The rules and exceptions on what offenses are eligible for expungement and sealing can be complicated to understand. If you are in Chicago or nearby communities and have questions about your civil rights, please contact our experienced attorneys for help you securing a better future. Police Shooting Cases Change Use of Force
Recent headlines could change the way police use force during arrests, according to the Chicago Tribune. Criticism of perceived racism and police brutality in the high-profile shootings in St. Paul, Minnesota and Baton Rouge, Louisiana has added tension to already strained police-community relations in Chicago. The video of the fatal shooting of Laquan Davis late last year led to protests and lingering anger against police. Some police officers believe the critical attitude toward police has lead to less “proactive” policing, such as traffic stops. Tension May Lead to Police Brutality However, today’s shooting of five police officers at a protest in Dallas, Texas underlines the danger facing on-duty police. In the past few days, several other attacks have occurred against police in Georgia, Tennessee, and Missouri, possibly in response to the accusations of police brutality in Louisiana and Minnesota, the Huffington Post reports. It’s possible for this perceived threat to lead to more use of force in arrests if police overestimate the danger of the situation. This could lead, ironically, to more incidents of police brutality. The Law on Deadly Force in Illinois Even if the social and political environment has changed, the law still lays down strict rules on the use of deadly force by police officers. In Tennessee v. Gardner, the Supreme Court held that police may only use deadly force when the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer or others. The Illinois Criminal Code repeats this rule on the use of force and elaborates on the type of situations that might pose a threat of serious physical harm. One specific situation is where the person the officer wishes to arrest has attempted or committed a violent felony that involved serious physical harm to someone, and where that person is attempting to escape. The statute specifically states that the use of a chokehold during an arrest should be considered deadly force. A chokehold is any contact with the neck or throat that is meant to reduce the intake of air. No Unreasonable Use of Deadly Force But when is a police officer justified in concluding that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm to the officer? In general, a court will evaluate whether the police officer’s decision was reasonable in the context of the facts as they appeared to him or her at the time of the use of force. For example, if a suspect reaches into their pocket, the police officer may only conclude that this justifies the use of lethal force if the circumstances at the time justify it, according to what a reasonable person would think. Since there is no hard and fast rule about what a reasonable person might perceive as a threat of physical injury, there’s no clear line between justified and unjustified use of force during an arrest. Get Legal Help Have you or someone you know been the victims of police brutality? If so, you’ll need expert legal guidance to help you get justice. Contact a police brutality lawyer at Barney & Hourihane in Chicago today to get the help you deserve. See Related Blog Posts Chicago Man Arrested on Basis of Eyewitness Identification
A Chicago man was arrested today for a shooting in Evanston, according to the Chicago Tribune.The shooting took place in the parking lot of an IHOP this past Sunday morning. The suspect, Cornelius Jones, is accused of shooting a Beach Park man multiple times. Jones was identified from a lineup by the shooting victim. Police identified Jones as a suspect based on distinctive tattoos on his forehead. When the shooting occurred, police had an active narcotics investigation involving Jones. Police executed a search warrant at his apartment on Wednesday night. Jones was taken into custody. During the search, they discovered a .40 caliber Smith & Wesson semi-automatic handgun with ammunition. They also discovered a small amount of marijuana. Jones is charged with aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated discharge of a firearm, unlawful use of a weapon by a felon, and unlawful possession of cannabis. Bail was set at $250,000, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. When Lineup Evidence is Admissible at Trial Jones was identified using a lineup. Suspect lineups are subject to strict rules under Illinois law. The Illinois Code of Criminal Procedure sets out rules for several different types of lineups:
The person administering the lineup is not supposed to know who the suspect is and who the filler are. Otherwise, they might influence the process to bias the witness. If there are multiple eyewitnesses, they are not allowed to confer with one another. When identifying a member of the lineup, no two eyewitnesses should be present at the same time. Otherwise, they might influence one another’s judgment. The fillers must not be substantially different in appearance from the suspect. Otherwise, the witness might pick the suspect simply because he or she is the only person in the lineup that resembles the perpetrator. What to do when Lineup Evidence is Unfair Violating any of these rules could prevent the use of the lineup procedure as evidence. If some violation occurred, a defendant’s attorney may file a motion to suppress the identification. If the judge decides that the way the lineup was conducted was too suggestive and that it may have produced an unreliable identification, the results of the identification can be kept away from the jury. If the results of the identification are allowed into evidence, the attorney can attempt to convince the jury that they should disregard the results, since they were produced by a biased process. Contact a Chicago Civil Rights Lawyer If you or someone you know has been arrested, you need immediate legal help. Contact an experienced criminal defense attorney at Barney & Hourihane in Chicago today, and defend your rights. See Related Blog Posts When thinking about criminal prosecutions, most residents are familiar with police investigation and trial. But what about after a conviction? There are many post-trial issues to understand after a person is found guilty of a crime.
Sentencing in Illinois If a defendant is convicted during a trial, or enters a guilty plea, the judge must determine the proper punishment, called a sentence. In many cases, especially for more serious crimes, there is a separate proceeding after the trial to determine the sentence. During this sentencing proceeding, the judge may weigh additional evidence to consider when sentencing. During this process, the judge receives a pre-sentence report with information about the defendant, including information about the family, background, and employment history. State officials develop, implements, and administers a range of recommended sentences for use by judges in criminal proceedings. Although the recommended sentences are discretionary (i.e., judges are not required to follow the guidelines when determining the length and type of penalty for a crime), there are sometimes specific rules that judges abide by in making their decision. For some crimes, the law may require a judge to impose a prison term no less than a predefined amount of time (called a minimum sentence). Minimum sentences differ according to the crime. Appeals in Illinois If a defendant loses his or her criminal trial, the defendant may appeal the decision to a higher court.
Throughout the appeals process, defendants have certain rights. It is essential that individuals facing criminal charges have adequate legal representation. Contact a Chicago Criminal Appeals Lawyer If you have been charged with a crime, it is critical to contact a skilled Chicago defense lawyer. Understanding your rights may be the difference between freedom and criminal prosecution. The experienced attorneys at Barney & Hourihane are dedicated to representing Illinois residents in all types of criminal matters, including appeals. Contact us today to schedule your free consultation. Dennis Hastert seemed to be the quintessential American success story. A wrestling coach and schoolteacher from the suburbs of Chicago, he went into politics, rising all the way up to become the Speaker of the House of Representatives. He was third in line to the presidency while Bill Clinton and George Bush were in office, and was the longest-serving Republican House Speaker in history.
Yet, according to some claims Dennis Hastert had a secret that nobody knew about. Before he became a legislator, some allege that a beacon of family values had betrayed the position of trust that he enjoyed at Yorkville High School. So much time had passed since his transgressions of thirty or more years ago, that when they first came to light it was already too late to hold him legally accountable for his actions, even if they occurred with under-aged boys. Understanding the Law in Illinois - Statutes of Limitations The reason why the former Speaker was not tried for allegations of sexual abuse has to do with the statute of limitations for these offenses. Interestingly enough, the controlling factor is not the dates of the abusive acts, but the age of the person who is seeking relief. The current law in Illinois states that a victim has twenty years from the time they turn 18 to file a claim for damages against their abuser or, in the case of repressed memories, five years after they discover that abuse has taken place. Notice that the age of the accuser is the relevant factor, and not when the abuse took place. Under the law those claiming abuse must be willing to come forward and name their abuser, and admit to the abusive acts occurred. In this case, Scott Cross, for example, was 53 years old when he testified about the actions of Coach Hastert. The statute of limitations had long expired, and there wasn't any way for him to bring legal action against Hastert. The addition of an extra five-year period opens up the possibility of claims being brought after a victim's 38th birthday has passed. Attorney General Lisa Madigan has proposed eliminating the statute of limitations for crimes of this nature, but this would require legislative action. This issue is an example of the myriad of rules that affect criminal law cases. No two cases are the same, and it is critical that everyone accused of a crime be given a fair chance to defend themselves. Claims made decades after the alleged incidents often place the defendant at a advantage as they try to muster evidence to show their innocence. Issues like the statute of limitations are one way that the rights of criminal defendants are protected. Contact a Chicago Criminal Law Attorney If you, or someone you love, has questions about the statute of limitations in this regard, contact the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Barney & Hourihane to arrange for a consultation. What is privacy?
Privacy means a lot of things, but in criminal court, and in the context of the 4th Amendment, it specifically means that an officer of the law cannot use evidence against you that he or she did not obtain through constitutionally approved search and seizure methods. These methods are complex and lend themselves to various interpretations, but essentially, they boil down to the following fundamental components: 1. An officer must have probable cause to perform a search. 2. If a search was illegal, then evidence seized cannot be used against someone unless an intervening event took place that would have created probable cause regardless of the illegal search (this is known as the “Attenuation Doctrine”) The 4th Amendment protects against unlawful searches and seizures and has been a cornerstone of our expectations of justice since its ratification in 1791. As part of the Bill of Rights, the 4th Amendment and subsequent interpretations of it, dictate the limitations on our country’s police authority to infringe upon on our freedom. Essentially, our founding fathers deemed privacy to be a basic human right constituting a major component of freedom. What are my Rights Regarding Unreasonable Search and Seizure? Monday, May 21, 2016, the definition of privacy was changed as traditionally understood in the context of the 4th Amendment. In Utah v. Strieff, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of allowing drug evidence, which was found as a result of an illegal stop, to be used against the defendant in criminal court. The arresting officer suspected the defendant of illegal drug activity and followed him to a convenient store and asked for his identification without cause. During this illegal stop, the police officer ran the suspect’s name through the database and discovered that the suspect had a warrant out for his arrest for a prior traffic violation. Upon learning about the warrant, the police officer performed a search of the suspect and did indeed find illegal drugs on him. The officer claimed that the discovery of the warrant satisfied the Attenuation Doctrine, so even though the stop was illegal, information obtained because of the stop gave the officer probable cause to search and subsequently arrest the suspect. The evidence was then allowed in court resulting in the suspect’s incrimination. The Supreme Court agreed. There is of course the following argument: If John Doe has a traffic warrant out for his arrest, then he should be arrested. The polarizing issue here, however, is that the arresting officer suspected him of drug activity, and after performing an illegal stop, was able to use incriminating evidence found during the illegal stop. Essentially, the officer was able to justify the search based on a warrant for an unrelated traffic incident that he wouldn’t have known about except for the fact that he made the illegal stop. The concern is that an illegal stop can now become a means to an end, meaning a person abiding by the law now has a very different expectation of privacy. Not only has the interpretation of 4th Amendment changed in regards to a person’s basic freedoms, but we now must ask how what incentives remain in place for the police force to abide by the mandates of the 4th Amendment. What do I do if I suspect I’ve been illegally stopped and searched? It is critical to protect the delicate relationship between law enforcement officers and the rights of community members. If you experienced any violation of your civil rights as a result of police misconduct, contact Barney & Hourihane today to discuss your case with a dedicated Chicago civil rights attorney. Our firm works with residents who are appealing their criminal conviction in Chicago. Grounds for appeal are varied. One reason that a prior conviction may be overturned on appeal is when the rules of evidence are misused or violated in an original trial.
There are many forms of evidence in criminal cases, and one particularly common form of evidence is witness statements. Witnesses can tell the court about what they saw or heard or about what they personally perceived or thought about a situation, person or circumstance. So long as a witness testifies about things he or she personally knows or said, the evidence is generally admissible in court. However, witness testimony evidence can become increasingly unreliable when the witness tells the court about something he or she heard someone else say. This unreliability comes from the fact that Witness A is telling the court about something Person B said… why not simply have Person B tell the court the same thing? In some situations, this type of witness testimony can constitute “hearsay” evidence, and there are special rules of evidence when it comes to hearsay statements. What Is Hearsay? In order for evidence to be useful in court, it must be reliable. Hearsay is a complicated form of evidence because sometimes it is unreliable, while other times it can be highly reliable. As such, the admissibility of hearsay evidence in court is govern by a lot of special rules (Illinois Rules of Evidence Rule 801-806). Things can get complicated because there are:
Hearsay Hearsay is a statement that can be made in writing, made orally or made through non-verbal conduct (e.g., a thumbs up gesture or a shrugging of the shoulders gesture), that is made outside of the courtroom by a declarant (i.e., the person who utters the statement), which is offered as evidence in court to prove the truth of the matter that is being asserted. As a rule, hearsay is generally inadmissible evidence in court. As previously mentioned, hearsay is generally excluded as evidence in court because of its inherent unreliability. To demonstrate this unreliability, consider the following example. If Witness A testified in court to hearing Declarant B say, “Defendant D told me that he stole the television,” there is an element of unreliability here because Witness A is telling the court something that Declarant B said regarding Defendant D. The testimony would have more credibility if Declarant B told the court directly what Defendant D said to him. Hearsay Exceptions Illinois Rules of Evidence Rules 803 and 804 provide a number of specific situations that constitute hearsay exceptions. These exceptions apply to statements that are hearsay (i.e., they are out-of-court statements offered for the truth of the matter asserted), but for other reasons these statements fall into the category of exceptions to the hearsay rule, and are admissible, because they are highly reliable statements. For example, one exception to the hearsay rule is directed to recorded recollections. A recorded recollection, such as a police statement made by a witness after a car accident, can be read to the court during trial. While the reading of the police report to the court is the reading of an out-of-court statement, as it is a written record made by the witness, that is offered for the truth of the matter it asserts (i.e., the police report is being read to the court as proof of the truth of the matter asserted), it is admissible since it is a highly reliable form of evidence. Additionally, 725 ILCS 5/115-10 specifically provides a number of scenarios that are hearsay exceptions. These exceptions to the hearsay rule exist to promote justice in cases involving the physical or sexual abuse of children or those who are intellectually disabled. There is a strong public policy reasoning for hearing all of the evidence that is available in cases that involve particularly vulnerable victims. Contact Chicago Criminal Appeals Lawyers It is important that you be represented by a sharp and experienced criminal defense lawyer at your trial and, if necessary, your appeal. When you are facing criminal charges so that inadmissible hearsay evidence stays out of your trial. Contact the legal team at Barney & Hourihane today to ensure that your rights are respected throughout the legal process. Police officers are empowered with certain rights and obligations to uphold and enforce the law. Society has recently called into question the age old notion of “protect and serve”. As more and more cases of police brutality are reported and spread across media outlets, debates over how much force an officer should use have ensued. While police officers have the right to use appropriate force to control dangerous situations, civil rights laws provide remedies when willful police conduct violates an individual’s civil liberties. The fine line rests between the appropriate amount of force and police misconduct in a particular situation.
Understanding the Rules The Chicago Police Rules and Regulations state that the use of reasonable physical force may be necessary in situations which cannot be otherwise controlled. Officers are permitted to use whatever force is reasonable and necessary to protect others or themselves from bodily harm. The law also states that the use of excessive and unwarranted force or brutality will not be tolerated under any circumstances. In the wake of several recent cases of police misconduct, it’s important for Chicago citizens to understand legal rights and remedies when stopped and questioned by a police officer. Police officers cannot search your vehicle without permission. You have the right to ask for a lawyer and to be protected by your Constitutional rights. While citizens have the right to protection from misconduct, police officers have rights to stop and question suspects. Respect and cooperation is suggested. However, if your rights are violated, always write down the officer’s name and badge number. If you are injured, seek medical attention and take photos of the injury as soon as possible. Lawyers like [name of the client] can support you in your effort to seek remedy for violation of your rights Beyond mere remedial efforts, the City of Chicago is taking recent events into account as officials seek reform. In an effort to better scrutinize issues of police misconduct, Chicago passed a new mandate requiring police officers to issue “stop receipts” after approaching someone. This mandate, amongst law enforcement reforms, have bi-partisan support and the backing of police unions. These measures are a positive step in the path to justice. Chicago Civil Rights Attorneys If you or a loved one feel a police officers has used unjustifiable force in an encounter, please contact our office today to see how we can help. Our Chicago police misconduct lawyers have years of experience in police misconduct and civil rights cases. We will discuss the facts of your case with you and explore whether you may have a civil rights claim. |
Archives
May 2019
Categories
All
|