United States v. Hillsman

522 F.2d 454 (1975)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

United States v. Hillsman

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
522 F.2d 454 (1975)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

James Hillsman and Clinton Bush (defendants) were among 200 to 300 mourners attending a funeral in Gary, Indiana. Several undercover federal agents were conducting surveillance outside the funeral home to observe and identify suspected drug dealers. All the agents wore ordinary street clothes and drove unmarked cars. Agent David Munson stationed himself with a video camera alongside newspaper photographers and began filming mourners as they left. A group of Black mourners demanded that Munson, who was White, stop filming and leave the area. Munson kept filming, and mourner William Hanyard began shoving and hitting Munson. Acting agent in charge Kenneth Rhodes, who was Black, drew his gun intending to shoot Hanyard, but the gun discharged prematurely. The bullet grazed Hanyard and hit and killed an innocent bystander. Rhodes immediately announced he was a federal agent and told Munson, “Let’s get out of here.” Although Munson heard that statement, he did not hear Rhodes announce he was an agent. As Rhodes went to his car, a woman in the crowd pointed him out as the shooter. A group of mourners began running after Rhodes, and both Hillsman and Bush fired shots at Rhodes’s car as he drove away. One bullet hit the car, but Rhodes escaped injury. Hillsman and Bush were charged with assaulting a federal officer. Both testified that they saw the skirmish involving Hanyard but, like agent Munson, did not hear Rhodes announce he was a federal agent. Both testified that they pursued Rhodes because they thought he was a felon fleeing the scene of a crime and wanted to stop him until police arrived. The trial judge gave the jury a lengthy instruction about the right to make a private citizen’s arrest, explaining that a citizen could use deadly force to stop a violent felon, but that a felony had to have actually occurred. The defense requested an instruction that did not specify that Rhodes had to have actually committed a felony, but the judge rejected that instruction. The jury convicted, and Hillsman and Bush appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Pell, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership