United States v. Ernest D. Shields
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10058
| 7th Cir. | 2015Background
- On Jan. 10, 2011 Chicago officers observed Shields's SUV partially blocking a crosswalk and approached to issue a parking ticket; they asked for his license and asked him to move to the rear of the vehicle.
- Shields fled on foot; Officer Coglianese chased him into an alley, observed Shields pull a .22 revolver from his pocket, tackled and handcuffed him, and recovered the loaded gun on the ground.
- Shields was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession) with a sentencing enhancement under the ACCA, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1); he moved to suppress the gun and statements and later sought dismissal on Second Amendment and jurisdictional grounds.
- The district court denied the suppression motion (traffic stop reasonable; flight and observed weapon supported probable cause; statements voluntary), denied continuance requests and Brady allegations, and found Shields subject to the 15-year ACCA mandatory minimum.
- A jury convicted Shields of felon-in-possession; at sentencing Shields (pro se) disputed prior-conviction treatment and asserted rights-restoration and Alleyne-based jury-rights claims; the court applied ACCA and imposed the 15-year mandatory minimum.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 924(e) predicates (priors) had to be proved to a jury / indictment constructively amended | Shields: his three priors were elements and must be submitted to a jury; indictment listing § 924(e) required proof of priors | Government: Almendarez-Torres treats priors as sentencing factors; Alleyne did not overrule that; indictment miscitation is harmless | Court: Almendarez-Torres controls; priors are sentencing factors, not elements; no constructive amendment or prejudice from citing § 924(e) in indictment (affirmed) |
| Motion to suppress (was stop/search/arrest lawful?) | Shields: he was not seized before running; parking citation didn’t justify subsequent arrest/search; evidence should be suppressed | Govt: officers had probable cause/reasonable suspicion for traffic stop; flight and observed weapon provided probable cause; gun plainly visible | Court: encounter was a seizure (traffic stop) supported by probable cause/reasonable suspicion; flight and observed removal of gun supplied probable cause; suppression denial affirmed |
| Brady claim (failure to disclose prior civil suit/material impeachment) | Shields: Gov’t withheld a 2004 lawsuit and related investigative materials about Officer Coglianese that could be exculpatory/impeaching | Govt: the lawsuit and settlement were public and available; no specific suppressed material alleged | Court: no Brady violation — documents were publicly available and Shields admitted access; allegations of undisclosed investigatory materials were speculative (plain-error review fails) |
| Motion to continue (late requests to file replies and obtain witnesses) | Shields: needed continuance 3 business days before trial to file replies and secure two witnesses | Govt: request untimely; adequate preparation time had elapsed; no specific prejudice shown | Court: denial not an abuse of discretion — request was too late, defendant had sufficient time, and no actual prejudice shown |
| ACCA prior-convictions and rights restoration (18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)) | Shields: two priors should be excluded because his civil rights had been restored (he recalled receiving a 2003 letter) | Govt: defendant bears burden to prove restoration by preponderance; no reliable restoration documentation provided | Court: Shields failed to prove restoration (no letter or clear record); district court properly counted priors under ACCA |
| Second Amendment challenge to § 922(g)(1) | Shields: ban on felon possession infringes Second Amendment rights under Heller/McDonald/Moore | Govt: longstanding prohibitions on felons are consistent with Heller; protecting public by keeping firearms from violent felons | Court: § 922(g)(1) constitutional as applied to Shields (violent felon); conviction and sentence upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (prior convictions are sentencing factors)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (facts increasing mandatory minimum are elements — but did not overrule Almendarez-Torres)
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (Second Amendment protects individual right but permits longstanding prohibitions, including felon bans)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (Second Amendment incorporated against the states; reaffirmed Heller limits)
- Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146 (probable cause may be based on any offense the officer reasonably believes occurred)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (reasonable suspicion standard for investigative stops)
- Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (consensual encounters vs. seizures)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1609 (traffic stop is a seizure analogous to Terry stop)
- Navarette v. California, 134 S. Ct. 1683 (reasonable suspicion standard under totality of circumstances)
- Heien v. North Carolina, 135 S. Ct. 530 (reasonable suspicion can be based on an objectively reasonable mistake of law)