Case Law People v. Jackson

People v. Jackson

Document Cited Authorities (30) Cited in (49) Related

Michael J. Pelletier, Patricia Mysza, and Whitney B. Price, of State Appellate Defender's Office, of Chicago, for appellant.

Kimberly M. Foxx, State's Attorney, of Chicago (Alan J. Spellberg, Miles J. Keleher, and Sheilah O'Grady-Krajniak, Assistant State's Attorneys, of counsel), for the People.

OPINION

PRESIDING JUSTICE HYMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 After James Jackson calls 911 for an ambulance, the paramedics arrive to find him "agitated," "nervous," "irrational," and "very uncooperative," suffering from some type of psychological issue and with an "altered" mental state. The paramedics call for police assistance. Jackson screams and flails; one officer uses his Taser on Jackson, striking him 10 times. Another officer tries to grab Jackson and gets kicked in the shins. Jackson resists being placed in handcuffs. Ultimately, the police subdue him and place him into the ambulance for transport to the hospital. Jackson is charged and convicted of battery and resisting arrest.

¶ 2 This, in sum, is what happened to James Jackson, and what happens all too often to individuals who may be experiencing a mental health or other crisis. When they (or their families) call for help, they are met with some use of force by officers. See U.S. Dep't of Justice Civil Rights Div. & U.S. Attorney's Office, Northern Dist. of Ill., Investigation of the Chicago Police Department 37 (2017), https://www.justice.gov/opa/file/925846/download (listing incidents where Chicago police officers "used force against people in crisis who needed help"). The DOJ report reveals that, as here, law enforcement officers, often "first responders" to mental health emergencies, are not necessarily trained or prepared to deal with the complex situations in which they may find themselves. The lesson in these cases can be stark: call 911 and someone could end up charged with a crime, or worse. (The dissent states that there is no evidence that Jackson was mentally ill,infra ¶ 101, but this ignores testimony from every state witness that Jackson was "irrational." The ultimate diagnosis is irrelevant—what matters is how Jackson acted.)

¶ 3 Battery against a police officer is a serious charge, but being kicked in the legs by a mentally unstable person (causing no serious injury) is not the type of touching that requires either specific or general deterrence. Sometimes, the initial decision to arrest or charge a defendant becomes a boulder rolling downhill, and no one feels strong enough to say, "stop," regardless of the resources wasted. The dissent feels we should not find fault with the officers' actions and theorizes that they had no choice but to wrestle Jackson to the ground and tase him 10 times. Infra ¶ 100. But the officers should have received training in how to de-escalate such a situation. The officers did not tase Jackson out of malice, but because they did not know what else to do. The restraint used on Jackson did not assist the paramedics in assessing Jackson's health—how could they do so, after he had been zapped with 50,000 volts? All they could do was bundle Jackson into an ambulance. The lack of training turned a call for help into a contentious encounter with police.

¶ 4 Prosecutors too should receive training to enable them to distinguish between those responsible for their actions and those, like Jackson, whose vulnerable or abnormal mental state causes them to act in uncooperative or confused ways. We will say it outright—this prosecution was a waste of time and money, all so that Jackson could be sentenced to 18 months of conditional discharge.

¶ 5 Jackson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. He also contends that several errors occurred during trial, which he asks us to review under the plain error standard. And he claims that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to preserve those errors.

¶ 6 We find the evidence was legally insufficient to support Jackson's conviction. Further, several errors occurred during trial—the trial court (i) failed to properly question potential jurors during voir dire; (ii) erringly admitted other-crimes evidence that Jackson smelled of marijuana; and (iii) erringly admitted opinion testimony from paramedics that Jackson was not having a seizure during the incident. The State in its closing argument relied on this inadmissible evidence, and so did the jury in convicting Jackson. We reverse Jackson's conviction, and the State may not retry him. People v. Lopez , 229 Ill. 2d 322, 367, 323 Ill.Dec. 55, 892 N.E.2d 1047 (2008) (State may not retry defendant once it has been determined evidence introduced at trial was insufficient to sustain conviction).

¶ 7 BACKGROUND

¶ 8 Before trial, the judge asked each panel of potential jury members whether they disagreed with, or would be unable to follow, the rules of law that (i) Jackson is presumed innocent; (ii) the State has the burden to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; (iii) Jackson did not need to present evidence; and (iv) Jackson's failure to testify could not be held against him. The judge did not ask the panels whether they understood and accepted these principles. Jackson's counsel did not object to these questions.

¶ 9 The relevant facts adduced at trial follow.

¶ 10 On December 10, 2010, James Jackson called 911 from his apartment building in Calumet City, and requested an ambulance. Calumet City fire department paramedic Timothy Piepenerink testified that he and his partner, Chris Stapleton, responded to an ambulance call for an unknown medical emergency at about 6:00 p.m. They arrived in a large ambulance labeled "Calumet City Fire Department" and entered the apartment building through the front door into a vestibule. A second door separated the vestibule from the rest of the building. Jackson was behind the second door, and said that he needed an ambulance. When Piepenerink identified himself, Jackson replied, "You are not the ambulance." Piepenerink observed that Jackson seemed "a little bit nervous and kind of upset."

¶ 11 Piepenerink and Stapleton coaxed Jackson outside to show him their ambulance, but Jackson loudly insisted they were not paramedics. Jackson began calling 911, repeatedly asking for an ambulance despite the dispatcher telling him the ambulance was there. Jackson began to yell profanities, so Stapleton requested police assistance. Piepenerink thought Jackson might be suffering from some type of psychological issue: "he was not rational. We couldn't get through to him. *** He was nervous. There was something going on." Stapleton thought that Jackson's "mental status was altered"; Jackson did not follow simple directions and did not seem to be thinking clearly. Piepenerink and Stapleton also noted that Jackson smelled of marijuana.

¶ 12 Jackson tried to go back inside the building but did not have his key for the second door, so he and the paramedics waited in the vestibule area for the police to arrive. During that time, Jackson kept yelling "don't touch me" and appeared agitated.

¶ 13 When Officer Dan Piech arrived, the paramedics met him in the driveway and informed him that Jackson was mentally unstable, or possibly under the influence of an unknown controlled substance. Jackson stayed in the vestibule screaming profanities and "I am not going." Officer Piech tried to calm Jackson and convince him to go with the paramedics, but Jackson kept yelling. Piech reached for Jackson's shoulder; Jackson pulled away and fell backwards, sliding down the vestibule wall to the floor. Jackson then began to punch and kick, in a manner Piech characterized as "defending myself" rather than "violent." Piech tried and failed to handcuff Jackson, while the paramedics attempted to hold down Jackson's legs. During the struggle, Jackson tried to bite Stapleton's arm. But, Stapleton pulled away and Jackson clamped down on Stapleton's sweatshirt. Piech then used his department-issued Taser, in the "dry stun" mode, to stun Jackson with 50,000 volts in the waist area. Normally, using the Taser would make a subject less combative. Piech tased Jackson "about 10 times." On Jackson, the Taser had "no affect whatsoever."

¶ 14 A few minutes later, Officer Gary Wojcik arrived. From outside, he could hear Jackson screaming. Inside the vestibule, Wojcik tried to assist Piech in handcuffing Jackson while the paramedics backed away. To Wojcik, Jackson seemed "irrational." He noticed that the vestibule had a "very strong odor of burnt cannabis," though he did not know where the smell had come from. Jackson kicked Wojcik several times in the lower legs. Wojcik put handcuffs on one of Jackson's wrists; Jackson pulled away, and began punching the glass window in the vestibule. Piech then tased Jackson again, which had no effect. After struggling for several minutes to subdue Jackson, the two officers succeeded in placing handcuffs on him. Jackson was placed on a stretcher, put in the ambulance, and transported to the hospital. There, Jackson was still unhinged and screaming.

¶ 15 According to Jackson's longtime girlfriend, Stephanie Stelly, Jackson wore leg braces, and suffered from seizures. Stelly had observed Jackson having seizures 10 to 20 times over the previous seven years, and the seizures did not always present in the same way. On the day of the incident, Stelly returned to the apartment building while Jackson was being placed in the ambulance. She saw blood on Jackson's face. His head was turning from side to side. Stelly had seen that motion before—when Jackson was going into or coming out of a seizure.

¶ 16 Piepenerink was unable to medically examine Jackson, but opined that Jackson had not had a seizure. Over defense objection, Piepenerink described what was typical of a seizure: "What ...

5 cases
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2018
People v. Jamison
"...of the evidence.¶ 32 In affirming the aggravated battery convictions, we find defendant's reliance on People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194, misplaced. In Jackson , another division of this court reversed a defendant's convictions for battery and resi..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2017
People v. Griffin
"..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2018
People v. Castillo
"...from knowing first degree murder to involuntary manslaughter. 720 ILCS 5/6-3 (West 2012) ; People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, ¶ 87, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194 (Mason, J., dissenting). ¶ 33 Castillo also contends that the trial court misconstrued the record in finding that he..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2020
People v. Risper
"...on his or her personal observations and recollections of concrete facts, not on specialized knowledge. People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, ¶ 49, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194. The opinion testimony is also improper and prejudicial when it goes to the ultimate question of fact to..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2018
In re N.A.
"...inconsistencies. People v. Wheeler , 226 Ill. 2d 92, 114, 313 Ill.Dec. 1, 871 N.E.2d 728 (2007) ; People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, ¶ 23, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194 ; People v. Ross , 229 Ill. 2d 255, 272, 322 Ill.Dec. 574, 891 N.E.2d 865 (2008). The trial court's findings ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2018
People v. Jamison
"...of the evidence.¶ 32 In affirming the aggravated battery convictions, we find defendant's reliance on People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194, misplaced. In Jackson , another division of this court reversed a defendant's convictions for battery and resi..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2017
People v. Griffin
"..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2018
People v. Castillo
"...from knowing first degree murder to involuntary manslaughter. 720 ILCS 5/6-3 (West 2012) ; People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, ¶ 87, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194 (Mason, J., dissenting). ¶ 33 Castillo also contends that the trial court misconstrued the record in finding that he..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2020
People v. Risper
"...on his or her personal observations and recollections of concrete facts, not on specialized knowledge. People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, ¶ 49, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194. The opinion testimony is also improper and prejudicial when it goes to the ultimate question of fact to..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2018
In re N.A.
"...inconsistencies. People v. Wheeler , 226 Ill. 2d 92, 114, 313 Ill.Dec. 1, 871 N.E.2d 728 (2007) ; People v. Jackson , 2017 IL App (1st) 142879, ¶ 23, 415 Ill.Dec. 249, 82 N.E.3d 194 ; People v. Ross , 229 Ill. 2d 255, 272, 322 Ill.Dec. 574, 891 N.E.2d 865 (2008). The trial court's findings ..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex