Big Changes in Discovery Procedure Pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 415(c)By Sara M. VigTraffic Laws and Courts, November 2020A look at the revisions to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 415(c), which precluded a defense attorney from giving the attorney’s client a copy of his/her own discovery in felony case until October 23.
Mandatory 180 Jail Was Not Appropriate Because of Ambiguities in DUI LawBy Brick Van Der SnickTraffic Laws and Courts, November 2020In People v. Rowell, the appellate court vacated the defendant's sentence and remanded the case for resentencing on the grounds that 625 ILCS 5/11-501(c)(3) is ambiguous and vague.
Playing Videos During Jury DeliberationsBy Hon. Edward MaloneyTraffic Laws and Courts, November 2020In People v. Hollahan, the Illinois Supreme Court reviewed whether reversible error was committed when, after the jury had retired to deliberate, the court granted the jury’s request to review a video but played it in the courtroom with the judge, parties and alternate jurors present.
Recent Cases and Cases of InterestBy Thomas M. MoranTraffic Laws and Courts, November 2020Summaries of recent cases of interest to traffic law practitioners.
Detective Sworn Report Not Fatal: People v. Raupp, 2020 IL App (2d) 190309By Adam M. MillerTraffic Laws and Courts, October 2020On February 20, 2020 the second district appellate court reversed a trial court’s decision to rescind a statutory summary suspension based on a defective sworn report and the resulting statutorily deficient notice.
Is Odor of Cannabis Enough?By Sarah VigTraffic Laws and Courts, October 2020On March 19, 2020 in People v. Hill, the Illinois Supreme Court weighed in on the issue of whether the odor of cannabis can be used as probable cause to search a vehicle.
No Video, No Discovery ViolationBy David FranksTraffic Laws and Courts, October 2020Absent evidence indicating that the state could have at one time produced an in-squad video and entire booking room video, and where the evidence did not prove that the recordings ever existed, the state did not commit a discovery violation.
Compelled Chemical Testing After Accident May Be UnconstitutionalBy James SternTraffic Laws and Courts, April 2020A summary of People v. Eubanks, in which the defendant appealed a conviction of first-degree murder, failure to report an accident involving death or injury, and aggravated driving under the influence.
The Factual Basis: Keep It SimpleBy Hon. Jeremy RicheyTraffic Laws and Courts, April 2020Unless the judge you are appearing in front of requires a detailed factual basis for a defendant's guilty plea, you should keep the factual basis short and focused.
Sufficient Information Was Conveyed During 911 Call to Properly Stop DefendantBy J. Brick Van Der SnickTraffic Laws and Courts, April 2020In People v. Shelton, the defendant appealed the trial court's ruling that he did not have ineffective trial counsel based on the fact that his trial counsel did not file a motion to suppress evidence based on a 911 call containing insufficient information for the arresting officer to develop reasonable suspicion.
Appellate Court Vacates Orders, Remands for New Revocation HearingBy J. Brick Van Der Snick & Andrew MorrisTraffic Laws and Courts, February 2020In People v. Nemec, the defendant appealed an order revoking his court supervision, an entry of a conviction, and an order to pay fines and costs, arguing he was deprived of his right to be properly admonished of his rights to be represented by counsel at his revocation hearing.
Case NotesBy Juliet BoydTraffic Laws and Courts, February 2020Summaries of two recent appellate cases of interest.
Language May Be a Barrier, Except for Warning to MotoristBy Ted HammelTraffic Laws and Courts, February 2020Last May, the third district appellate court reversed a trial court’s decision rescinding the statutory summary suspension on the grounds of inadequate warnings.
MDDP IssuesBy Ted HarvatinTraffic Laws and Courts, December 2019An overview of the Monitoring Device Driving Permit Program.
The Corpus Delicti RuleBy J. Brick Van Der Snick & Andrew L. MorrisTraffic Laws and Courts, August 2019A summary of People v. Sanchez, in which the defendant appealed his conviction for one count of driving under the influence of alcohol.
Has Missouri v. McNeely Been Overruled by Mitchell v. Wisconsin?By Larry A. DavisTraffic Laws and Courts, August 2019In Mitchell v. Wisconsin, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a Wisconsin statute providing for a warrantless blood draw from an unconscious DUI suspect is always constitutional, except in the rarest of circumstances, pursuant to the “exigent circumstances” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.
Low-speed bicycles and driving while revoked/suspendedBy Ted HarvatinTraffic Laws and Courts, October 2018The Illinois General Assembly, recognizing the growing popularity of power-assisted bicycles and the lack of clarity regarding regulatory oversight of them, recently enacted legislation to address these uncertainties.
Probable cause in your DUI caseBy Hon. Joel BergTraffic Laws and Courts, October 2018An at-a-glance reference for the next time you have a summary suspension or motion to suppress hearing in a DUI case.
Recent cases of interestBy Thomas M. MoranTraffic Laws and Courts, October 2018Summaries of recent traffic law cases in the areas of proximate cause, non-consensual blood draws, private property, margin of error, state action, and agency and state action.
Appellate court affirms finding of guilty after stipulated bench trialBy J. Brick Van Der SnickTraffic Laws and Courts, June 2018In People v. Beck, the appellate court affirmed the lower court's finding that the testimony pertaining to retrograde extrapolation met the Frye standard.
The attorney as advocate and counselorBy Alan JonesTraffic Laws and Courts, December 2002As with any other litigators, DUI defense attorneys are sworn to be forceful advocates for our clients.
People v. Reggie Smith: The proper foundation for admission of a videotapeBy Daniel T. GillespieTraffic Laws and Courts, December 2002In People v. Reggie Smith, 321 Ill. App. 3d 669, 749 N. E. 2d 986, 255 Ill. Dec. 504 (1st Dist. 2001), the appellate court set forth the proper foundation requirements for the introduction of a videotape.
CorrectionTraffic Laws and Courts, November 2002In the last edition of the Traffic Laws & Courts newsletter (Vol. 12, No. 1) an article appeared entitled, "Boating while under the influence (BUI)," written by Douglas Olivero.
