(Court opinion corrected 6/24/20.) Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of 2 counts of resisting a peace officer's performance of authorized act.Evidence did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant knowingly resisted arrest. at about 5:30 a.m., officers responded to a 911 call made by Defendant's sister; he exited the house when he heard her calling his name. No evidence that Defendant had been awake for more than 5 minutes when, despite the fact that he was voluntarily cooperating with police requests that he peak with them, he was restrained from reentering the home. Less than 10 seconds later, without telling him that he was under arrest, 2 officers grabbed him from behind and forcefully put him on the ground, telling him to put his hands behind his back. Defendant had not committed any crime, nor did police have probable cause to believe he had committed one.Police told him he was under arrest only after he was handcuffed.Officer did not have authority to detain Defendant and subsequently seize him, and thus Defendant was at liberty to ignore officer's commands to stay outside and put his hands behind his back, to pull away from officer, and to resist being handcuffed for purpose of temporary detention. (ZENOFF and JORGENSEN, concurring.)
Illinois Appellate Court
Criminal Court
resisting arrest