On August 12, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings the judgment of the Circuit Court of Kane County granting the defendant's motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence found pursuant to a search of the defendant's home by probation officers.
On June 26, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Henry County denying Bernstein's motion to suppress and sentencing him to 48 months probation for unlawful possession of marijuana with intent to deliver.
On April 15, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court of McDonough County granting the defendants' motions to suppress two bags containing approximately 28 or 29 boxes of pseudoephedrine collected during a search of the defendant's motor vehicle after a traffic stop for improper lane usage.
On March 4, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, affirmed the judgment of the circuit court quashing the arrest of the defendant and suppressing the evidence resulting from that arrest.
On October 9, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, reversed the ruling of the Circuit Court of Cook County granting the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to an illegal search of defendant’s home.
On August 9, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, Third District, reversed the decision of the Circuit Court of Will County granting the defendant's motion to suppress evidence found in the defendant's vehicle.
On September 26, 2006, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, reversed the appellant's conviction in the Circuit Court of Cook County for violating section 12-612 of the Illinois Vehicle Code. 625 ILCS 5/12-612.
In a dog-sniff case, the Illinois Supreme Court wrote that it will interpret state constitutional provisions more expansively than their federal counterparts only under limited circumstances.
On December 23, 2004, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, affirmed the Circuit Court of Adam County's decision denying the defendant's motion to suppress incriminating evidence found in his vehicle during a search incident to his arrest.
On October 12, 2004, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Kane County, granting the defendant's motion to suppress evidence seized from his vehicle after he was stopped by a police officer for three traffic violations.
On August 27, 2004, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, affirmed the Circuit Court of Kane County's decision granting the defendant's motion to quash arrest and suppress seized evidence.
On April 2, 2004, the Second District Appellate Court affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Kendall County, granting the defendant's motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence.
Here's a summary of two opinions that came down after last month's Journal article on the Illinois Supreme Court's recent interpretation of the Terry doctrine went to press.
On October 29, 2003, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District, reversed the Circuit Court of Douglas County's denial of the defendant's motion to suppress and remanded for further proceedings.
On September 18, 2003, the Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the circuit and appellate courts' judgments to suppress evidence found during a search of the defendant's motel room in which a probationer subject to a search condition was staying.
On February 5, 2003, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District, affirmed the order of the Circuit Court of Marion County convicting the defendant of home invasion and aggravated criminal sexual assault.
On October 18, 2002, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights were violated when the police stopped him at a roadblock created to gather information about a hit and run accident .
On June 17, 2002, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District, modified its decision and reversed the defendant's conviction for possession of a controlled substance (cocaine) with intent to deliver because the court ruled in favor of suppressing the only evidence of the defendant's guilt.
On May 24, 2002, the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court of DuPage County and held that certain statements the defendant made as to ownership of items in his vehicle were properly suppressed by the trial court.
On May 28, 2002, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the holding of the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois and the defendant's conviction.
In last term's Kyllo decision, the Supreme Court restricted police power to use sense-enhancing technology. Here's an analysis of the decision and its implications.
