United States v. Erick Charles, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 16352

Background

In May 2008 Nedra Summerise called 911 twice reporting a road‑rage incident in a narrow Chicago alley: the other driver approached her, pounded her window, and exposed a handgun in his waistband.
Dispatch broadcast a detailed description of the suspect and location; two officers arrived minutes later. Sergeant Baranowski saw Erick Charles emerge from a red Ford Taurus parked at the alley entrance and match the description.
Baranowski observed a bulge under Charles’s clothing, detained and frisked him, then looked through the open driver’s door, saw a green gun case, opened it, and found a loaded pistol and extra ammunition. Charles was charged under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
Charles moved to suppress the gun one week before trial; the new judge combined the suppression hearing and a bench trial over defense objection. The judge suppressed statements but admitted the gun and convicted Charles at the bench trial.
After posttrial motions and a transfer back to the original judge, Judge Zagel found the gun should have been suppressed but denied a new trial (or relief) as untimely/harmless; Charles was sentenced to 15 years and appealed.

Issues

Issue	Charles’s Argument	Government’s Argument	Held
Whether the warrantless search of Charles’s car violated the Fourth Amendment	Search incident to Terry/vehicle search was improper; gun was not plainly visible or supported by probable cause	Dispatcher’s 911 report plus on‑scene observations gave probable cause to search under the automobile exception	Search was lawful under automobile exception; probable cause existed to search vehicle and containers
Whether consolidating suppression hearing with bench trial violated Rule 12(d) / prejudiced defendant	Consolidation denied timely pretrial ruling; violated Rule 12 and impaired ability to litigate suppression separate from trial	Defendant waived jury and consented to bench trial; no prejudice shown because evidence of guilt was overwhelming	Court erred in deferring a pretrial ruling without finding good cause, but error was harmless because defendant suffered no prejudice
Whether reliance on then‑existing Chicago and Illinois gun bans was reasonable for probable cause	Later invalidation of laws undermines probable cause to search	Officers may rely on laws until declared unconstitutional; reliance was reasonable at the time	Probable cause based on alleged violations and 911 report was reasonable despite later invalidation of laws
Whether exclusion of the gun would have affected sentencing or plea options	Suppression ruling earlier might have led to a plea or different sentencing	Charles’s violent‑felony record triggered ACCA mandatory minimum; plea could not have produced a lesser sentence	No plausible scenario presented where earlier suppression ruling would have produced a lesser sentence; no prejudice shown

Key Cases Cited

Carroll v. United States, 267 U.S. 132 (recognizing automobile exception to warrant requirement)
United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798 (scope of automobile search equals that which a magistrate could authorize by warrant)
Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (limits on vehicle searches incident to arrest; reaffirming automobile exception principles)
McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (addressing Chicago handgun ban and Second Amendment implications)
Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 31 (police may rely on statutes until declared unconstitutional for Fourth Amendment purposes)
Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933 (invalidating Illinois concealed‑carry restriction)
United States v. Edwards, 769 F.3d 509 (Seventh Circuit discussion of probable cause for vehicle searches)
United States v. Nicksion, 628 F.3d 368 (Seventh Circuit on scope of vehicle/container searches)
United States v. Reed, 443 F.3d 600 (probable cause standard considers officer training/experience)
In re United States, 614 F.3d 661 (mandamus as limited remedy during criminal trial)