Sign Up for Vincent AI
People v. Pinkett
Kwame Raoul, Attorney General, of Springfield (Jane Elinor Notz, Solicitor General, and Katherine M. Doersch and Joshua M. Schneider, Assistant Attorneys General, of Chicago, of counsel), for the People.
James E. Chadd, State Appellate Defender, Catherine K. Hart, Deputy Defender, and Jessica L. Harris and Sarah G. Lucey, Assistant Appellate Defenders, of the Office of the State Appellate Defender, of Springfield, for appellee.
¶ 1 Defendant Michael B. Pinkett was detained in a Walmart bathroom, was ordered to accompany a sheriff’s deputy to the front of the store, and complied with the deputy’s orders to "not make a scene." At Pinkett’s subsequent trial on criminal and motor vehicle violations, the State commented on defendant’s silence in its opening statement, defendant sought a mistrial, and the Pike County circuit court denied his motion. Defendant was found guilty, and he appealed, arguing, in part, that the circuit court should have granted his motion for a mistrial. The appellate court agreed that defendant was entitled to a mistrial, finding that the circuit court erred in denying defendant’s motion for a mistrial and reversed and remanded. 2021 IL App (4th) 190172-U, 2021 WL 1424727. We affirm the judgment of the appellate court.
¶ 3 Defendant was charged with aggravated fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer (625 ILCS 5/ll-204.1(a)(1) (West 2016)), resulting from a June 2017 incident where he failed to stop his motorcycle in response to police sirens and lights and traveled more than 21 miles per hour over the speed limit. Additional charges of speeding1 (id. § 11-601(b)) and failure to use a turn signal (id. § 11-804(d)) were added in July 2018.
¶ 4 At a preliminary hearing, Pike County Sheriff’s Department deputy sheriff Brad Wassell testified to his 13-mile pursuit of three motorcycles at a high rate of speed in June 2017. On cross-examination, Wassell said he could not recall if defendant’s motorcycle lacked rearview mirrors but, if defendant could not see behind him and did not turn around, it is possible defendant did not know Wassell was in pursuit. Wassell stated, if defendant was wearing earplugs, to hear the siren, above the noise of the motorcycles and the wind. At the end of the hearing, the circuit court found probable cause existed.
¶ 5 A jury trial took place. Evidence presented at the trial established that defendant was ultimately arrested inside a Walmart based on his alleged act of fleeing and eluding a peace officer. Prior to opening statements, the trial court informed the jury that In its opening statement, the State said that the arresting officers would "both testify in spite of the fact that they tried to arrest him there at Walmart without making a scene since it’s in the middle of the store, at no point did he ever ask in any way the reason why he was being detained." Defense counsel objected, a sidebar took place, and defense counsel moved for a mistrial, arguing that it was improper to comment on defendant’s right to remain silent. The State disagreed, arguing that a defendant’s postarrest, pre-Miranda silence (see Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966)) is not constitutionally protected, citing People v. Givens, 135 Ill. App. 3d 810, 90 Ill.Dec. 504, 482 N.E.2d 211 (1985). Applying Givens, the trial court denied the mistrial motion.
¶ 6 Wassell testified he was on duty on June 10 in uniform in an unmarked sheriff’s department vehicle. While on patrol traveling westbound outside of Pittsfield, he noticed three motorcycles riding east-bound in a triangular formation. The motorcycle at the front was a "crotch-rocket" style sport motorcycle, while the other two looked like Harley-Davidson models. The motorcycles appeared to be speeding. He activated his radar gun, which was calibrated and in working order, and clocked the motorcycles at 78 miles per hour in a 55-mile-per-hour speed zone. He pulled onto the shoulder and activated the vehicle’s lights, which included visor lights, a Wig-Wag system that alternates the headlights, side warning lights in the headlights, and blue and red lights in the grille.
¶ 7 After the motorcycles drove past him without stopping, he did a U-turn and began to pursue them. The motorcycles reduced their speed to 60 or 65 miles per hour but did not stop. He turned on his siren and continued pursuit from approximately 200 feet behind them. They all arrived at a four-way stop in the town of Atlas, where Wassell pulled within 10 or 15 feet of the motorcycles and turned off his siren. He observed that the front motorcyclist wore a helmet and a large black knife sheathed at his waist. The motorcycle lacked rearview mirrors and had a piece of plastic dragging from its undercarriage and a darkened license plate. The passenger on one of the other motorcycles looked back at Wassell, who gestured for the motorcycle to pull over. It did not. All three motorcycles stopped before proceeding through the intersection. Wassell continued to pursue the motorcycles from 100 to 300 feet behind them.
¶ 8 As the pursuit neared Pittsfield, Wassell noticed Pittsfield police officer Lisa Hobbs sitting in her squad car in a commercial driveway off the side of the road. After they passed Hobbs, who had activated her emergency lights as the motorcycles neared her location, the motorcycles disengaged from the triangle formation into a single file, sped up, and passed an SUV. At that point, Wassell was traveling at 90 miles per hour in a 45-mile-per-hour zone. He fell behind the motorcycles and lost sight of two of the motorcyclists, including defendant. He pursued the third motorcycle and ultimately arrested the driver at a gas station in Pittsfield where the motorcyclist had stopped.
¶ 9 Wassell identified, and the jury viewed, still pictures from Hobbs’s squad car camera as the SUV and motorcycles passed her, Wassell’s interview of defendant, and surveillance footage videos from Pike Feed and Walmart. He identified the three motorcycles and Hobbs passing Pike Feed in its video. In the Walmart video, he identified a motorcycle pulling into the lot and two motorcycles being pursued by two squad cars driving by on the road in front of the store. He also identified still photographs of the motorcycles shown in the Walmart video and pictures he had taken of two of the motorcycles, including defendant’s.
¶ 10 On cross-examination, Wassell said defendant told him he did not see the deputy’s lights because he was looking down when he initially passed Wassell. The motorcyclists did not split up or take other evasive actions. He followed the SUV for approximately a mile during the pursuit before it pulled off the road. Wassell acknowledged that defendant’s motorcycle did not have rearview mirrors, he did not see defendant turn around at any time, defendant was wearing a helmet, and the motorcycles were louder than smaller motorcycles. He also stated that, if defendant were wearing a face mask that covered his ears, with the wind and motorcycle noise, it would be difficult to hear the siren.
¶ 11 Hobbs, who worked part-time as a Pittsfield police officer, testified. She was also a part-time officer for the Pleasant Hill Police Department and a full-time officer for the Pike County Sheriff’s Department. She heard Wassell’s request for assistance and positioned her car in the driveway of an implement dealership located on the road the motorcycles were travelling. Her squad car was perpendicular to the roadway. When she heard Wassell’s siren, she turned on her MARS lights, which activated her dashboard camera. The video showed the motorcyclists driving by less than a minute later with Wassell a few seconds behind them. She joined the pursuit, and the video showed her squad car following Wassell into Pittsfield and into the gas station where he arrested one of the motorcyclists.
¶ 12 Hobbs was then dispatched to Walmart. On her way to the store, she stopped to pick up from the roadway a small leather item, which remained unidentified. When she arrived at Walmart, she noted a black motorcycle in the parking lot and found a black face mask on the ground. She waited while Sergeant Matt Frazier entered the store. On cross-examination, she examined a photograph of defendant entering Walmart, acknowledged there was an item hanging around defendant’s neck but said she could not tell if it was earplugs or otherwise identify it.
¶ 13 Frank Smith testified. He was in the Walmart parking lot in Pittsfield with his family when defendant pulled in on his motorcycle and startled him. He estimated defendant’s speed to be between 40 and 45 miles per hour. The defendant drove around to the back of the store near the loading dock. Smith then heard sirens and "loud pipes going by" and saw two motorcycles drive by with two squad cars in pursuit. The other motorcycle emerged from behind the store and parked by the pallets of mulch. The driver entered the store carrying a shirt or jacket. Smith called his friend who was an Illinois State Police (ISP) officer and told him about the motorcyclist.
¶ 14 Smith said another motorcycle with a female passenger also pulled into the Walmart parking lot and went around the back of the building before backing into a spot next to the parking spot from which he was in the process of backing out. The passenger dismounted the motorcycle and began to walk toward the store entrance when she then turned around and remounted the motorcycle,...
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 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
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
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
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