Monday, April 12, 2010
Friday, April 9, 2010
Reasonable Doubt
Reasonable Doubt
U.S. v. Milbourn, No. 08-2525 (April 7, 2010) S.D. Ind., Indianapolis Div. Affirmed
Record contained sufficient evidence to support defendant's conviction on charges of conspiracy to intimidate or interfere with third-parties' use of their home on account of their race by burning cross on front lawn of said individuals' home. While defendant argued that evidence failed to establish that he was motivated by bi-racial makeup of occupants of home, record showed that defendant had uttered to others that he had "burned a cross on a nigger's yard." Moreover, jury could properly have viewed burning cross as evidence of racism and as threatening act of intimidation.
U.S. v. Milbourn, No. 08-2525 (April 7, 2010) S.D. Ind., Indianapolis Div. Affirmed
Record contained sufficient evidence to support defendant's conviction on charges of conspiracy to intimidate or interfere with third-parties' use of their home on account of their race by burning cross on front lawn of said individuals' home. While defendant argued that evidence failed to establish that he was motivated by bi-racial makeup of occupants of home, record showed that defendant had uttered to others that he had "burned a cross on a nigger's yard." Moreover, jury could properly have viewed burning cross as evidence of racism and as threatening act of intimidation.
Evidence
Evidence
U.S. v. Jones, No. 09-1740 et al. Cons. (April 7, 2010) S.D. Ind., Evansville Div. Affirmed and vacated in part and remanded
Defendant was entitled to new trial on drug conspiracy charge where police officer was allowed to identify defendant's voice on recorded conversation where said identification was based in part on officer's claim that he had overheard conversation between defendant and his counsel prior to court hearing. Admission of officer's testimony precluded defendant's counsel from conveying to jury in any meaningful way fact that defendant had disputed officer's claim that conversation with defendant's counsel had occurred, and officer's other basis for making said identification was limited to brief statements defendant had made in-court. Moreover, Dis t. Ct. should have explored conflict of interest arising out of advocate witness rule before denying defendant's motion for mistrial
U.S. v. Jones, No. 09-1740 et al. Cons. (April 7, 2010) S.D. Ind., Evansville Div. Affirmed and vacated in part and remanded
Defendant was entitled to new trial on drug conspiracy charge where police officer was allowed to identify defendant's voice on recorded conversation where said identification was based in part on officer's claim that he had overheard conversation between defendant and his counsel prior to court hearing. Admission of officer's testimony precluded defendant's counsel from conveying to jury in any meaningful way fact that defendant had disputed officer's claim that conversation with defendant's counsel had occurred, and officer's other basis for making said identification was limited to brief statements defendant had made in-court. Moreover, Dis t. Ct. should have explored conflict of interest arising out of advocate witness rule before denying defendant's motion for mistrial
Criminal Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction
U.S. v. Leija-Sanchez, No. 09-2672 (April 8, 2010) N.D. Ill., E. Div. Reversed
Dist. Ct. erred in dismissing charge under 18 USC section 1959, alleging that defendant arranged and paid for murder of Mexican citizen that took place in Mexico, after finding that section 1959 did not apply to crimes occurring outside of U.S. Dismissal was improper where instant murder was designed to facilitate operation of criminal enterprise located in U.S.
U.S. v. Leija-Sanchez, No. 09-2672 (April 8, 2010) N.D. Ill., E. Div. Reversed
Dist. Ct. erred in dismissing charge under 18 USC section 1959, alleging that defendant arranged and paid for murder of Mexican citizen that took place in Mexico, after finding that section 1959 did not apply to crimes occurring outside of U.S. Dismissal was improper where instant murder was designed to facilitate operation of criminal enterprise located in U.S.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Lake Co. judge candidate will not accept donations
Daily Herald
Lake Co. judge candidate will not accept donations
By Tony Gordon | Daily Herald Columnist
Published: 4/7/2010 12:01 AM
A candidate for circuit judge in the 6th Judicial Subcircuit has announced he intends to personally finance his own campaign.
Michael Perillo of Grayslake, the Democratic challenger of Circuit Judge Jorge Oritz, said he wants to make sure he is seen as free from outside influence if elected to the bench.
"I am committed to running a truly independent campaign and ultimately serving as a truly independent judge," Perillo said. "Accordingly, I am instructing my campaign committee to refund donations previously received and to accept no further monetary contributions."
Judicial candidates have spent from $20,000 to more than $100,000 in recent Lake County elections, and Perillo said he hopes the stand he is taking will lead to a general discussion of campaign finance regulations for judicial races.
He began his legal career as an attorney in the Navy's Judge Advocate General Corps at Great Lakes, then served as an assistant public defender and assistant state's attorney before going into private practice.
The 6th Subcircuit includes Antioch, Grayslake, Lake Villa, Lindenhurst and Winthrop Harbor.
Scholarships available
Lake County high school students are encouraged to apply for scholarships to attend the Illinois Teenage Institute on Substance Abuse.
The five-day institute is a prevention education program scheduled to be held July 18 through July 22 at Monmouth College in Monmouth.
The Illinois Sheriff's Association is awarding 60 scholarships statewide to cover tuition, lodging, workshop materials, meals and recreation.
Applicants should be responsible teens under 18 who will be in high school for the 2010-11 school year, willing to attend the entire institute and willing to serve as a youth leader and prevention resource in his or her school, neighborhood or community.
More information and applications go to www.os-iti.org or call the Lake County sheriff's office at (847) 377-4050.
Applications should be returned to the sheriff's office by April 16.
Heard in the hallway
Condolences to Debbie Hoem, adult referral specialist for the Lake County Probation Department, on the recent death of her husband, retired Gurnee police officer Charles Hoem.
Lake Co. judge candidate will not accept donations
By Tony Gordon | Daily Herald Columnist
Published: 4/7/2010 12:01 AM
A candidate for circuit judge in the 6th Judicial Subcircuit has announced he intends to personally finance his own campaign.
Michael Perillo of Grayslake, the Democratic challenger of Circuit Judge Jorge Oritz, said he wants to make sure he is seen as free from outside influence if elected to the bench.
"I am committed to running a truly independent campaign and ultimately serving as a truly independent judge," Perillo said. "Accordingly, I am instructing my campaign committee to refund donations previously received and to accept no further monetary contributions."
Judicial candidates have spent from $20,000 to more than $100,000 in recent Lake County elections, and Perillo said he hopes the stand he is taking will lead to a general discussion of campaign finance regulations for judicial races.
He began his legal career as an attorney in the Navy's Judge Advocate General Corps at Great Lakes, then served as an assistant public defender and assistant state's attorney before going into private practice.
The 6th Subcircuit includes Antioch, Grayslake, Lake Villa, Lindenhurst and Winthrop Harbor.
Scholarships available
Lake County high school students are encouraged to apply for scholarships to attend the Illinois Teenage Institute on Substance Abuse.
The five-day institute is a prevention education program scheduled to be held July 18 through July 22 at Monmouth College in Monmouth.
The Illinois Sheriff's Association is awarding 60 scholarships statewide to cover tuition, lodging, workshop materials, meals and recreation.
Applicants should be responsible teens under 18 who will be in high school for the 2010-11 school year, willing to attend the entire institute and willing to serve as a youth leader and prevention resource in his or her school, neighborhood or community.
More information and applications go to www.os-iti.org or call the Lake County sheriff's office at (847) 377-4050.
Applications should be returned to the sheriff's office by April 16.
Heard in the hallway
Condolences to Debbie Hoem, adult referral specialist for the Lake County Probation Department, on the recent death of her husband, retired Gurnee police officer Charles Hoem.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Fines paid, strip club and adult stores closed in Lake County
Fines paid, strip club and adult stores closed in Lake County
After long fight, Lake County gets paid last of money it’s owed by strip club, adult video shop and adult bookstore
By Georgia Garvey, Tribune reporter
March 24, 2010
Lake County struggled with some adult businesses — including two strip clubs — for more than a decade, fining the owners for breaking rules on getting licenses and for not closing their doors at midnight.
For several years after a court ruled the owners should pay more than $738,000, the debts remained outstanding. But County Board officials and the Lake County state's attorney's office recently announced the end of that saga, with a payment of more than $233,000 from the last business.
"It wasn't really a matter of whether we were going to collect from them; it was a matter of when," Assistant State's Attorney Dan Jasica said.
Some are calling the process a win for officials looking to regulate the county's two remaining adult establishments. Jasica said those businesses comply with county regulations, and, as far as he knows, are operating without crimes like prostitution that sometimes accompany adult establishments.
Suzi Schmidt, board chairman and adult use commissioner for the county, said having the owners of Video Magic finally pay the fines levied in 2007 is viewed by officials as a victory. It took patience but, she said, county officials and prosecutors had a single-minded purpose.
"I said, ‘We're going to collect.' ... The taxpayers shouldn't have paid for this," Schmidt said, referring to the protracted legal battle the county engaged in with the owners of Video Magic, Baby Dolls and 41 News, all at the corner of U.S. Highway 41 and Illinois Highway 173 near Wadsworth, and a strip club called Dancers on Lake Cook Road at U.S. Highway 12.
An adult bookstore, 41 News, is the only one remaining. Video Magic was an adult video store; Baby Dolls was a strip club.
The county amended its adult use ordinance in 1998, Schmidt said, to make it stricter. At the time, Jasica said, the businesses were warned they weren't complying with some of the new rules that included a ban on enclosed peep show booths and a minimum distance between dancers and customers.
The businesses sued the county, claiming they were being targeted for closure and that the ordinance was unconstitutional. In 2003, a county judge upheld the law, as did the Illinois Appellate Court.
Louis Pissios, an attorney who represented Video Magic and Baby Dolls, said the ordinance was ridiculous, banning conversations, physical interactions and direct tipping from customer to dancer. And one of the owners had testified that 70 percent of his business took place after midnight.
"We spent a long time fighting about the constitutionality of the ordinance," Pissios said. The new rules, he said, were "just designed to put adult entertainment out of business."
After the courts ruled in the county's favor, the four businesses would have had to apply for the licenses they had been fighting. Instead, three closed.
"They'd been there for 30 years. They'd employed hundreds and hundreds of people," Pissios said of his two clients.
Schmidt disagreed that the county tried to shut down the businesses. She said she just wanted them to play fair.
"I wasn't out to get anybody," she said. "They weren't following the ordinance."
And though residents may not have joined in the court battles, some are more than pleased the businesses wound up shuttered.
Wadsworth Mayor Glenn Ryback said many people mistakenly thought three of the businesses were in his community. He also worried that strip clubs and pornographic bookstores didn't display the proper image to visitors fresh over the Wisconsin border.
"If it has to be there, I would like to see it somewhere in a less visible location," Ryback said. He doesn't condone the businesses anywhere, he said, but knows communities are hamstrung constitutionally in the types of restrictions they can enact. Adult businesses "just cannot be regulated away."
Roger Handyside, pastor of Cornerstone Community Church in Wadsworth, said he prayed every time he drove past them.
They were "blight(s) on the area, because of what they traffic in," Handyside said. Driving past one of the businesses' signs, he often saw the face of a woman he'd known when she was younger.
"Every time I went by there, it just tore me up," he said.
ggarvey@tribune.com
Freelance reporter Ralph Zahorik contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2010, Chicago Tribune
After long fight, Lake County gets paid last of money it’s owed by strip club, adult video shop and adult bookstore
By Georgia Garvey, Tribune reporter
March 24, 2010
Lake County struggled with some adult businesses — including two strip clubs — for more than a decade, fining the owners for breaking rules on getting licenses and for not closing their doors at midnight.
For several years after a court ruled the owners should pay more than $738,000, the debts remained outstanding. But County Board officials and the Lake County state's attorney's office recently announced the end of that saga, with a payment of more than $233,000 from the last business.
"It wasn't really a matter of whether we were going to collect from them; it was a matter of when," Assistant State's Attorney Dan Jasica said.
Some are calling the process a win for officials looking to regulate the county's two remaining adult establishments. Jasica said those businesses comply with county regulations, and, as far as he knows, are operating without crimes like prostitution that sometimes accompany adult establishments.
Suzi Schmidt, board chairman and adult use commissioner for the county, said having the owners of Video Magic finally pay the fines levied in 2007 is viewed by officials as a victory. It took patience but, she said, county officials and prosecutors had a single-minded purpose.
"I said, ‘We're going to collect.' ... The taxpayers shouldn't have paid for this," Schmidt said, referring to the protracted legal battle the county engaged in with the owners of Video Magic, Baby Dolls and 41 News, all at the corner of U.S. Highway 41 and Illinois Highway 173 near Wadsworth, and a strip club called Dancers on Lake Cook Road at U.S. Highway 12.
An adult bookstore, 41 News, is the only one remaining. Video Magic was an adult video store; Baby Dolls was a strip club.
The county amended its adult use ordinance in 1998, Schmidt said, to make it stricter. At the time, Jasica said, the businesses were warned they weren't complying with some of the new rules that included a ban on enclosed peep show booths and a minimum distance between dancers and customers.
The businesses sued the county, claiming they were being targeted for closure and that the ordinance was unconstitutional. In 2003, a county judge upheld the law, as did the Illinois Appellate Court.
Louis Pissios, an attorney who represented Video Magic and Baby Dolls, said the ordinance was ridiculous, banning conversations, physical interactions and direct tipping from customer to dancer. And one of the owners had testified that 70 percent of his business took place after midnight.
"We spent a long time fighting about the constitutionality of the ordinance," Pissios said. The new rules, he said, were "just designed to put adult entertainment out of business."
After the courts ruled in the county's favor, the four businesses would have had to apply for the licenses they had been fighting. Instead, three closed.
"They'd been there for 30 years. They'd employed hundreds and hundreds of people," Pissios said of his two clients.
Schmidt disagreed that the county tried to shut down the businesses. She said she just wanted them to play fair.
"I wasn't out to get anybody," she said. "They weren't following the ordinance."
And though residents may not have joined in the court battles, some are more than pleased the businesses wound up shuttered.
Wadsworth Mayor Glenn Ryback said many people mistakenly thought three of the businesses were in his community. He also worried that strip clubs and pornographic bookstores didn't display the proper image to visitors fresh over the Wisconsin border.
"If it has to be there, I would like to see it somewhere in a less visible location," Ryback said. He doesn't condone the businesses anywhere, he said, but knows communities are hamstrung constitutionally in the types of restrictions they can enact. Adult businesses "just cannot be regulated away."
Roger Handyside, pastor of Cornerstone Community Church in Wadsworth, said he prayed every time he drove past them.
They were "blight(s) on the area, because of what they traffic in," Handyside said. Driving past one of the businesses' signs, he often saw the face of a woman he'd known when she was younger.
"Every time I went by there, it just tore me up," he said.
ggarvey@tribune.com
Freelance reporter Ralph Zahorik contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2010, Chicago Tribune
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Motions to Suppress 2d Dist. Consent to Search
Motions to Suppress 2d Dist.
People v. Davis , No. 2-08-0168 (February 24, 2010) Lake Co. (ZENOFF) Reversed.
State failed to prove that Defendant's girlfriend inevitably would have consented to search of her apartment if she had been told only that she was under investigation for her role in battery of victim who told police that drugs were being sold from there. Police officer exploited his discovery of scale and white powder, which dominated conversation, and her consent appeared to be given because of fear of charge for possession of scale and white powder. Thus, consent was involuntary, and evidence found during subsequent search of apartment should have been suppressed.
People v. Davis , No. 2-08-0168 (February 24, 2010) Lake Co. (ZENOFF) Reversed.
State failed to prove that Defendant's girlfriend inevitably would have consented to search of her apartment if she had been told only that she was under investigation for her role in battery of victim who told police that drugs were being sold from there. Police officer exploited his discovery of scale and white powder, which dominated conversation, and her consent appeared to be given because of fear of charge for possession of scale and white powder. Thus, consent was involuntary, and evidence found during subsequent search of apartment should have been suppressed.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Illinois high court OKs DUI eye test
Illinois high court OKs DUI eye test
HGN test asks person to follow pen or finger with eyes; reliance on it was questioned in McKown case
By ANDY KRAVETZ (akravetz@pjstar.com)
OF THE JOURNAL STAR
The Illinois Supreme Court on Friday upheld a DUI eye test commonly used by police as "generally accepted in the relevant scientific fields as evidence of alcohol consumption and possible impairment."
However, the justices sent the drunken-driving case of Joanne McKown back to Peoria County on the basis that prosecutors here didn't lay a proper legal foundation to show the horizontal gaze nystagmus test was properly administered.
HGN testing is based upon the premise that if a person has been drinking, his or her pupils would not follow a pen or a finger smoothly.
The unanimous decision by the seven justices in Springfield seems to settle the dispute over HGN testing for Illinois. The question is important because police officers statewide use the test as a benchmark to see if a person is under the influence.
What made McKown's 2002 traffic stop different from most stops is that the officer appears to relied almost exclusively on the HGN test to find she was intoxicated on June 8, 2002, when her car collided with three motorcycles on Maher Road.
The matter has been the subject of lengthy court hearings, including four marathon sessions in Peoria County Circuit Court in 2007 and 2008. The case also was reviewed by the 3rd District Appellate Court in Ottawa and the Illinois Supreme Court. The high court remanded the case to Peoria in 2007 for the 2007-2008 hearings to determine the science behind the testing.
McKown, 45, whose hometown is listed as Hanna City in court records, was convicted of aggravated driving under the influence and aggravated reckless driving at a 2003 bench trial and sentenced to two years in prison.
After the accident, a witnesses testified he smelled beer on her breath. The investigating officer also testified he smelled beer and said he found a half-empty beer can in her car. McKown, who was taken to the hospital after the crash, told him she drank beer earlier that day.
The officer did the HGN test at the hospital not long after the accident, and McKown failed. He did no other field sobriety tests because she had a broken toe. A blood test wasn't done for several hours because she resisted until she was court-ordered to give blood. When it was done, the test showed no alcohol in her system.
The appellate court upheld McKown's conviction, saying the test is "a reliable indicator of alcohol impairment."
Yet the Supreme Court disagreed in 2007, saying the test differed from others given because the results to the average person were meaningless, while the effect of alcohol on a person's balance was easily understood.
HGN test asks person to follow pen or finger with eyes; reliance on it was questioned in McKown case
By ANDY KRAVETZ (akravetz@pjstar.com)
OF THE JOURNAL STAR
The Illinois Supreme Court on Friday upheld a DUI eye test commonly used by police as "generally accepted in the relevant scientific fields as evidence of alcohol consumption and possible impairment."
However, the justices sent the drunken-driving case of Joanne McKown back to Peoria County on the basis that prosecutors here didn't lay a proper legal foundation to show the horizontal gaze nystagmus test was properly administered.
HGN testing is based upon the premise that if a person has been drinking, his or her pupils would not follow a pen or a finger smoothly.
The unanimous decision by the seven justices in Springfield seems to settle the dispute over HGN testing for Illinois. The question is important because police officers statewide use the test as a benchmark to see if a person is under the influence.
What made McKown's 2002 traffic stop different from most stops is that the officer appears to relied almost exclusively on the HGN test to find she was intoxicated on June 8, 2002, when her car collided with three motorcycles on Maher Road.
The matter has been the subject of lengthy court hearings, including four marathon sessions in Peoria County Circuit Court in 2007 and 2008. The case also was reviewed by the 3rd District Appellate Court in Ottawa and the Illinois Supreme Court. The high court remanded the case to Peoria in 2007 for the 2007-2008 hearings to determine the science behind the testing.
McKown, 45, whose hometown is listed as Hanna City in court records, was convicted of aggravated driving under the influence and aggravated reckless driving at a 2003 bench trial and sentenced to two years in prison.
After the accident, a witnesses testified he smelled beer on her breath. The investigating officer also testified he smelled beer and said he found a half-empty beer can in her car. McKown, who was taken to the hospital after the crash, told him she drank beer earlier that day.
The officer did the HGN test at the hospital not long after the accident, and McKown failed. He did no other field sobriety tests because she had a broken toe. A blood test wasn't done for several hours because she resisted until she was court-ordered to give blood. When it was done, the test showed no alcohol in her system.
The appellate court upheld McKown's conviction, saying the test is "a reliable indicator of alcohol impairment."
Yet the Supreme Court disagreed in 2007, saying the test differed from others given because the results to the average person were meaningless, while the effect of alcohol on a person's balance was easily understood.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
People v. Joseph Murray
Bond modified in Zion slaying case
February 18, 2010
Because witnesses in the Zion New Year's Day killing have received threatening phone calls related to their potential testimony, Assistant State's Attorney Pat Fix asked the court to modify the bond of the accused killer at his arraignment Wednesday. She told the News-Sun that she could not elaborate on the nature of the threats.
Joseph Murray, 32, was arrested for allegedly killing Curtis Pride due to jealousy over a woman, according to Zion police. Pride was found shot to death Jan. 1 in the 2700 block of Galilee Avenue.
Murray is being held in lieu of a $3 million bond. Judge Daniel Shanes modified his bond conditions so that he is allowed no contact with three of the state's witnesses, which include a 13-year-old eyewitness to the slaying and some of the victim's relatives, Fix said.
Murray pleaded not guilty to three counts against him presented at his arraignment.
He pleaded not guilty to six counts of first-degree murder. He could serve 45 years to life for the first three counts and 20 to 60 years in prison for the other three counts, Shanes said. Because it is a murder charge, Shanes said he would have to serve 100 percent of his sentence if found guilty.
He is also charged with unlawful possession of a firearm and aggravated fleeing a police officer for a Dec. 30, 2009 incident. He is said to have been driving when an officer gave him a visual signal to pull over in Zion. Rather than pull over, he attempted to elude the officer. He was found with a gun and .38-caliber bullets.
Murray is also charged with aggravated battery for allegedly grabbing a hospital worker around the neck on Dec. 24, 2009. Zion police arrested him for this incident, according to court computer records.
He was on parole when he committed the alleged offenses, according to the Illinois Department of Corrections. He was paroled Nov. 3, 2009, for felony escape of a police officer in Lake County from a 2001 offense, according to the DOC Web site. He also served four years in prison for aggravated discharge of a firearm and was taken into custody for that in 1996, according to the DOC Web site.
Murray is represented by his attorney, Louis Pissios.
He is due back in court March 9 and his trial is scheduled for March 22.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
C.D.L. D.U.I.
Lake County D.U.I. Attorney
Illinois drivers with a commercial driver's license (C.D.L.) are held to a higher standard of responsibility than the general public. C.D.L. holders caught with a blood alcohol content of .04 or more are disqualified from driving commercial vehicles for a year. Multiple offenders are disqualified for life. If you have a C.D.L. and face D.U.I. penalties, you need a lawyer dedicated solely to drunk driving defense
I give people in Lake County Illinois, skilled and informed legal representation. Because I focus solely on criminal and D.U.I. / D.W.I. defense, I know the laws and what it takes to reduce the charges and lessen harsh criminal penalties. I have handled several drunk driving cases and I am well versed in the procedures to save your C.D.L..
Call my Waukegan, Illinois office (across the street from the courthouse) at 847-263-0001 for a free consultation.
Supervision Conviction
While it is possible for a C.D.L. driver to get supervision after a D.U.I. arrest, D.U.I. supervision along with other traffic offenses are still listed on the license as conviction whether or not you were driving a commercial vehicle when you received the D.U.I. or the other offense. Saving your C.D.L. becomes a matter of amending the charge and reducing penalties. I am committed to helping my clients retain their driver's license and avoid D.U.I. convictions on their record. I can help save your license and your job.
Do You Really Need a C.D.L.?
I understand that holding a C.D.L. gives one a sense of pride and accomplishment. More importantly, it is the way that many people make a living and provide for their family. Many people want to retain their license for future use, even if they do not currently drive commercial vehicles. However, if you do not currently need a C.D.L. and will not need one in the near future, I encourage you to declassify your license. You can always get your C.D.L. back, if needed. You cannot always regain your driving privileges if caught drinking and driving.
Save Your CDL: Contact an Experienced DUI Defense Attorney
If you have a commercial driver's license and have been charged with D.U.I., please contact me me.
Illinois drivers with a commercial driver's license (C.D.L.) are held to a higher standard of responsibility than the general public. C.D.L. holders caught with a blood alcohol content of .04 or more are disqualified from driving commercial vehicles for a year. Multiple offenders are disqualified for life. If you have a C.D.L. and face D.U.I. penalties, you need a lawyer dedicated solely to drunk driving defense
I give people in Lake County Illinois, skilled and informed legal representation. Because I focus solely on criminal and D.U.I. / D.W.I. defense, I know the laws and what it takes to reduce the charges and lessen harsh criminal penalties. I have handled several drunk driving cases and I am well versed in the procedures to save your C.D.L..
Call my Waukegan, Illinois office (across the street from the courthouse) at 847-263-0001 for a free consultation.
Supervision Conviction
While it is possible for a C.D.L. driver to get supervision after a D.U.I. arrest, D.U.I. supervision along with other traffic offenses are still listed on the license as conviction whether or not you were driving a commercial vehicle when you received the D.U.I. or the other offense. Saving your C.D.L. becomes a matter of amending the charge and reducing penalties. I am committed to helping my clients retain their driver's license and avoid D.U.I. convictions on their record. I can help save your license and your job.
Do You Really Need a C.D.L.?
I understand that holding a C.D.L. gives one a sense of pride and accomplishment. More importantly, it is the way that many people make a living and provide for their family. Many people want to retain their license for future use, even if they do not currently drive commercial vehicles. However, if you do not currently need a C.D.L. and will not need one in the near future, I encourage you to declassify your license. You can always get your C.D.L. back, if needed. You cannot always regain your driving privileges if caught drinking and driving.
Save Your CDL: Contact an Experienced DUI Defense Attorney
If you have a commercial driver's license and have been charged with D.U.I., please contact me me.
Monday, February 8, 2010
People v. Joseph Murray, first degree murder
I have been retained to represent defendant Joseph Murray in People v. Joseph Murray 10 CF 88 and 10 CF 56. Joseph is charged, at least at this point, with two counts of first degree murder and aggravated domestic battery. I am working with Faya Kacos of FKS Investigations as our investigator in this case and we already have already had some very interesting interviews with witnesses. The arraignment is set for February 11, 2009 here in Waukegan in the Lake County Circuit Courthouse. More to come, as is allowable, in the future.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Speedy Trial Act - Illinois
Ill App - Criminal - Speedy Trial Act / Objections
People v. Hampton, No. 2-08-0368 (2d Dist. Sept. 18, 2009, corrected Sept. 28, 2009) O'MALLEY (Kane Co.) Reversed and remanded.
Speedy Trial Act is not to be used as a sword to avoid threat of conviction; even where defense counsel made general objection to State's motion for trial continuance, defense counsel should have raised specific objection to proposed trial date beyond 120-day deadline. Defense counsel proposed such date, although trial court had offered to move trial date earlier. Time calculations for Speedy Trial Act commence on date a defendant is taken into custody, not on date request for speedy trial is made or on date objection to continuance is made.
People v. Hampton, No. 2-08-0368 (2d Dist. Sept. 18, 2009, corrected Sept. 28, 2009) O'MALLEY (Kane Co.) Reversed and remanded.
Speedy Trial Act is not to be used as a sword to avoid threat of conviction; even where defense counsel made general objection to State's motion for trial continuance, defense counsel should have raised specific objection to proposed trial date beyond 120-day deadline. Defense counsel proposed such date, although trial court had offered to move trial date earlier. Time calculations for Speedy Trial Act commence on date a defendant is taken into custody, not on date request for speedy trial is made or on date objection to continuance is made.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Ill Criminal - DUI / Jury Demand
Ill App - Criminal - DUI / Jury Demand
People v. Ziobro , Nos. 3-08-0770, 3-08-0771, 3-08-0793, 3-09-0071, 3-09-0072, Cons. (3d Dist. Jan. 13, 2010) LYTTON (Will Co.) Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
Defendants were given first appearance dates on traffic citations beyond prescribed period of Rule 504, and filed motions to dismiss at their first appearance dates. Those defendants who had timely filed jury trial demand 10 days prior to first appearance date, and announced "ready for trial" at first appearance, were entitled to dismissal with prejudice of their DUI citations, as prosecutor was not ready for trial at first appearance. One defendant, whose charge did not include jail time, who had not filed jury demand, and who did not announce ready for trial at first appearance, was not entitled to dismissal with prejudice.
People v. Ziobro , Nos. 3-08-0770, 3-08-0771, 3-08-0793, 3-09-0071, 3-09-0072, Cons. (3d Dist. Jan. 13, 2010) LYTTON (Will Co.) Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
Defendants were given first appearance dates on traffic citations beyond prescribed period of Rule 504, and filed motions to dismiss at their first appearance dates. Those defendants who had timely filed jury trial demand 10 days prior to first appearance date, and announced "ready for trial" at first appearance, were entitled to dismissal with prejudice of their DUI citations, as prosecutor was not ready for trial at first appearance. One defendant, whose charge did not include jail time, who had not filed jury demand, and who did not announce ready for trial at first appearance, was not entitled to dismissal with prejudice.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
INFORMATION: BAID INTERLOCK DEVICE
Do You Know That Illinois May Order You to Install a Breath-Alcohol Ignition Interlock Device in Your Car?
On January 1, 2009, a new law went into effect that changed the driver's license suspension rules first-time DUI / DWI offenders in Illinois. If you are arrested for a drunk driving and want to be allowed to drive, you will be required to have a breath-alcohol ignition interlock device (BAIID) installed in every car you own — at your own expense.
If you have been arrested for drunk driving, call an accomplished DUI lawyer to protect your rights. I, Attorney Louis M. Pissios, and I have been practicing traffic and drunk-driving defense for 20 years.
For a free initial consultation, contact experienced DUI lawyer Louis M. Pissios online at lawyerpissios.com, or call toll free: 847 263-0001.
Getting a Breath-Alcohol Ignition Interlock Device to Keep Your LicenseThe requirement to get an ignition interlock device applies to people who have been arrested for a first drunk-driving offense, which is usually charged as misdemeanor DUI. Its purpose is to prevent alcohol abuse and multiple DUI offenses.
As in the past, if you arrested for a first drunk-driving offense, your driver's license is automatically suspended unless you challenge that suspension. Now, if you are allowed to retain your driver's license, it will be on the condition that you install an ignition interlock device in each of your cars at your own expense.
Before you can start your car, you will have to blow into the device, which performs a breath-alcohol test. If your blood-alcohol content registers at .05 or higher, the ignition interlock device will not allow your car to start.
Each ignition interlock device costs about $80 in monthly rent. There is an installation fee of about $100, and monthly monitoring costs about $30.
In order to drive with an ignition interlock device, you will need to request a Monitoring Device Driving Permit (MDDP) from the court. Your MDDP will not be valid until the 31st day of the statutory summary suspension period. Commercial truck drivers may also be eligible for an MDDP.
The ignition interlock device is required merely because you were arrested. There are additional penalties if you are convicted, including thousands of dollars in fines and possible prison time. A conviction may also affect future employment and insurance rates.
I Handle Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor (SCRAM) Monitoring Cases I also represent clients who are ordered by the court to wear a Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor or SCRAM. This device measures the amount of alcohol present in your perspiration, and must be worn all the time.
If you have been arrested for a first DUI offense or may be ordered to submit to an alcohol monitoring device, call my law firm in Waukegan, Illinois. I will make sure you get a chance to keep driving and protect your rights in court.
On January 1, 2009, a new law went into effect that changed the driver's license suspension rules first-time DUI / DWI offenders in Illinois. If you are arrested for a drunk driving and want to be allowed to drive, you will be required to have a breath-alcohol ignition interlock device (BAIID) installed in every car you own — at your own expense.
If you have been arrested for drunk driving, call an accomplished DUI lawyer to protect your rights. I, Attorney Louis M. Pissios, and I have been practicing traffic and drunk-driving defense for 20 years.
For a free initial consultation, contact experienced DUI lawyer Louis M. Pissios online at lawyerpissios.com, or call toll free: 847 263-0001.
Getting a Breath-Alcohol Ignition Interlock Device to Keep Your LicenseThe requirement to get an ignition interlock device applies to people who have been arrested for a first drunk-driving offense, which is usually charged as misdemeanor DUI. Its purpose is to prevent alcohol abuse and multiple DUI offenses.
As in the past, if you arrested for a first drunk-driving offense, your driver's license is automatically suspended unless you challenge that suspension. Now, if you are allowed to retain your driver's license, it will be on the condition that you install an ignition interlock device in each of your cars at your own expense.
Before you can start your car, you will have to blow into the device, which performs a breath-alcohol test. If your blood-alcohol content registers at .05 or higher, the ignition interlock device will not allow your car to start.
Each ignition interlock device costs about $80 in monthly rent. There is an installation fee of about $100, and monthly monitoring costs about $30.
In order to drive with an ignition interlock device, you will need to request a Monitoring Device Driving Permit (MDDP) from the court. Your MDDP will not be valid until the 31st day of the statutory summary suspension period. Commercial truck drivers may also be eligible for an MDDP.
The ignition interlock device is required merely because you were arrested. There are additional penalties if you are convicted, including thousands of dollars in fines and possible prison time. A conviction may also affect future employment and insurance rates.
I Handle Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor (SCRAM) Monitoring Cases I also represent clients who are ordered by the court to wear a Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor or SCRAM. This device measures the amount of alcohol present in your perspiration, and must be worn all the time.
If you have been arrested for a first DUI offense or may be ordered to submit to an alcohol monitoring device, call my law firm in Waukegan, Illinois. I will make sure you get a chance to keep driving and protect your rights in court.
Constitutional strip club client
This is a news story from 2007 when, after fight against Lake County's Adult Use Ordinance successfully for 9 years including up to the Illinois and United States Supreme Court we lost a round.
2 strip clubs ordered closed
June 29th, 2007 | Uncategorized | Comments Off
Chicago IL [Chicago Tribune] - A judge closed two Lake County strip clubs and an adult video store Thursday because they don’t have licenses to operate as adult businesses.
Circuit Judge Margaret Mullen’s order closed Dancers on U.S. Highway 12 and Lake-Cook Road near Lake Zurich, and Baby Dolls and Video Magic, both on U.S. Highway 41 near Wadsworth, said Assistant State’s Atty. Dan Jasica.
County officials have been battling the businesses since 1998 when the Lake County Board passed an ordinance requiring that adult businesses be licensed and follow regulations that include closing on Sunday and state holidays. In 2003 Circuit Judge Raymond McKoski upheld the ordinance after Baby Dolls, Dancers and Video Magic filed a lawsuit challenging it.
The verdict was appealed and upheld by an Illinois Appellate Court. In 2005 the Illinois Supreme Court declined to hear the case, and last year the U.S. Supreme Court refused the appeal. After the appeals were denied, the county filed for an injunction a year ago to force the businesses to be licensed, court records show. The businesses could be fined as much as $500 a day since 1998 for not complying with the ordinance, Jasica said.
After several delays, Mullen ruled against the businesses Thursday and scheduled a hearing Aug. 8 to decide how much to fine them. “We’ll certainly be asking for a $500 a day fine going back a considerable amount of time,” Jasica said.
Lou Pissios, a Waukegan attorney who represents the businesses, said they would close Thursday, and 100 to 125 employees would lose their jobs. “Those are families with children and households and mortgages,” Pissios said.
The businesses have been open about 25 years, he said. He doesn’t think the county’s adult-use ordinance is a true reflection of what the public wants.
Three employees at Video Magic had little to say Thursday afternoon, and a closed sign was placed on the business.
The strip club owners said the county’s ordinance will force them out of business because they would have to close by midnight and ban nude dancing, according to the Appellate Court ruling. Both clubs would have to build a stage that is at least 18 inches above the seating area. The audience also would have to be seated at least 8 feet from the stage.
The ordinance forbids dancers to receive tips directly from customers. All customers would have to be at least 21.
Neither Baby Dolls nor Dancers serves alcohol and both allow patrons 18 and up, according to court records. A sign at Baby Dolls said the business closes at 4 a.m. on weekends and is open from 3 to 11 p.m. Sunday.
Both Michael Christofalos, who owns Dancers, and Danny Christofalos, the owner of Baby Dolls, testified during the trial in Lake County Circuit Court that they make at least 70 percent of their money after midnight.
Both said the stage requirements would significantly hurt their businesses.
Neither owner could be reached for comment nor could George Stantopolous, who owns Video Magic.
Jasica said Lake County has two adult businesses that are licensed — 41 News, an adult bookstore on U.S. Highway 41 near Wadsworth, and Select Video on Russell
2 strip clubs ordered closed
June 29th, 2007 | Uncategorized | Comments Off
Chicago IL [Chicago Tribune] - A judge closed two Lake County strip clubs and an adult video store Thursday because they don’t have licenses to operate as adult businesses.
Circuit Judge Margaret Mullen’s order closed Dancers on U.S. Highway 12 and Lake-Cook Road near Lake Zurich, and Baby Dolls and Video Magic, both on U.S. Highway 41 near Wadsworth, said Assistant State’s Atty. Dan Jasica.
County officials have been battling the businesses since 1998 when the Lake County Board passed an ordinance requiring that adult businesses be licensed and follow regulations that include closing on Sunday and state holidays. In 2003 Circuit Judge Raymond McKoski upheld the ordinance after Baby Dolls, Dancers and Video Magic filed a lawsuit challenging it.
The verdict was appealed and upheld by an Illinois Appellate Court. In 2005 the Illinois Supreme Court declined to hear the case, and last year the U.S. Supreme Court refused the appeal. After the appeals were denied, the county filed for an injunction a year ago to force the businesses to be licensed, court records show. The businesses could be fined as much as $500 a day since 1998 for not complying with the ordinance, Jasica said.
After several delays, Mullen ruled against the businesses Thursday and scheduled a hearing Aug. 8 to decide how much to fine them. “We’ll certainly be asking for a $500 a day fine going back a considerable amount of time,” Jasica said.
Lou Pissios, a Waukegan attorney who represents the businesses, said they would close Thursday, and 100 to 125 employees would lose their jobs. “Those are families with children and households and mortgages,” Pissios said.
The businesses have been open about 25 years, he said. He doesn’t think the county’s adult-use ordinance is a true reflection of what the public wants.
Three employees at Video Magic had little to say Thursday afternoon, and a closed sign was placed on the business.
The strip club owners said the county’s ordinance will force them out of business because they would have to close by midnight and ban nude dancing, according to the Appellate Court ruling. Both clubs would have to build a stage that is at least 18 inches above the seating area. The audience also would have to be seated at least 8 feet from the stage.
The ordinance forbids dancers to receive tips directly from customers. All customers would have to be at least 21.
Neither Baby Dolls nor Dancers serves alcohol and both allow patrons 18 and up, according to court records. A sign at Baby Dolls said the business closes at 4 a.m. on weekends and is open from 3 to 11 p.m. Sunday.
Both Michael Christofalos, who owns Dancers, and Danny Christofalos, the owner of Baby Dolls, testified during the trial in Lake County Circuit Court that they make at least 70 percent of their money after midnight.
Both said the stage requirements would significantly hurt their businesses.
Neither owner could be reached for comment nor could George Stantopolous, who owns Video Magic.
Jasica said Lake County has two adult businesses that are licensed — 41 News, an adult bookstore on U.S. Highway 41 near Wadsworth, and Select Video on Russell
Monday, January 25, 2010
Drug Cases
Waukegan Drug Case Defense Attorney
Drug and narcotics crimes in Illinois can be either misdemeanors or felonies. The level of punishment that can be imposed for a drug offense generally depends on the type and amount of drug in question. While the possession of large amounts of controlled substances frequently carries a mandatory prison sentence, the penalties for most drug offenses allow for dispositions of probation and other lesser sentences.
If you have been charged with a drug offense, Louis M. Pissios is here to help. Attorney Louis M. Pissios knows the ins-and-outs of drug crime law, including the laws governing illegal search and seizure, warrant and warrantless arrests, the execution of search warrants, and other issues relevant to building your defense
Lake County Cannabis & Cocaine Defense Lawyer
Louis M. Pissios represents people charged in all types of misdemeanor and felony drug cases, including those involving cannabis (marijuana), cocaine, crack, heroin, methamphetamine (meth), mushrooms, peyote, LSD and ecstasy. Specific charges this office defends include:
Unlawful Possession of Cannabis
Unlawful Possession of Cannabis with the Intent to Deliver
Unlawful Possession of Drug Paraphernalia
Unlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance
Unlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance with the Intent to Deliver
Unlawful Delivery (of any substance)
Possession of a Look-Alike Substance
Prescription Fraud
Manufacturing
Controlled Substance Trafficking
Calculated Criminal Drug Conspiracy
Defending Small Amounts to Major Drug Busts
If you are charged with a drug offense, you could be facing serious penalties. Louis Pissios has significant prior experience handling all types of drug and narcotics charges. He has successfully handled cases ranging in seriousness from the possession of a small amount of marijuana, to the distribution of hundreds of thousands of dollars of cocaine by international drug cartels.
Pissios’ work in this area has repeatedly led to positive outcomes for his clients. This office has helped people avoid jail and prison time and misdemeanor and felony convictions that would have become permanent parts of their criminal records.
Pissios’ defense trials felony-level drug case frequently were followed and reported upon extensively by the press.
As an attorney, Pissios has handled an exceedingly-wide variety of Illinois drug cases. These include small pot and drug paraphernalia busts to complex, interstate narcotics investigations involving multiple charged defendants and investigating agencies. Pissios has worked on cases that involved HIDTA, DEA, LCMEG, DEA, Waukegan N.E.T., U.S. Marshals Service and local police investigation. Many such investigations employed court-approved wiretaps (overhears), search warrants and arrest warrants.
Drug and narcotics crimes in Illinois can be either misdemeanors or felonies. The level of punishment that can be imposed for a drug offense generally depends on the type and amount of drug in question. While the possession of large amounts of controlled substances frequently carries a mandatory prison sentence, the penalties for most drug offenses allow for dispositions of probation and other lesser sentences.
If you have been charged with a drug offense, Louis M. Pissios is here to help. Attorney Louis M. Pissios knows the ins-and-outs of drug crime law, including the laws governing illegal search and seizure, warrant and warrantless arrests, the execution of search warrants, and other issues relevant to building your defense
Lake County Cannabis & Cocaine Defense Lawyer
Louis M. Pissios represents people charged in all types of misdemeanor and felony drug cases, including those involving cannabis (marijuana), cocaine, crack, heroin, methamphetamine (meth), mushrooms, peyote, LSD and ecstasy. Specific charges this office defends include:
Unlawful Possession of Cannabis
Unlawful Possession of Cannabis with the Intent to Deliver
Unlawful Possession of Drug Paraphernalia
Unlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance
Unlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance with the Intent to Deliver
Unlawful Delivery (of any substance)
Possession of a Look-Alike Substance
Prescription Fraud
Manufacturing
Controlled Substance Trafficking
Calculated Criminal Drug Conspiracy
Defending Small Amounts to Major Drug Busts
If you are charged with a drug offense, you could be facing serious penalties. Louis Pissios has significant prior experience handling all types of drug and narcotics charges. He has successfully handled cases ranging in seriousness from the possession of a small amount of marijuana, to the distribution of hundreds of thousands of dollars of cocaine by international drug cartels.
Pissios’ work in this area has repeatedly led to positive outcomes for his clients. This office has helped people avoid jail and prison time and misdemeanor and felony convictions that would have become permanent parts of their criminal records.
Pissios’ defense trials felony-level drug case frequently were followed and reported upon extensively by the press.
As an attorney, Pissios has handled an exceedingly-wide variety of Illinois drug cases. These include small pot and drug paraphernalia busts to complex, interstate narcotics investigations involving multiple charged defendants and investigating agencies. Pissios has worked on cases that involved HIDTA, DEA, LCMEG, DEA, Waukegan N.E.T., U.S. Marshals Service and local police investigation. Many such investigations employed court-approved wiretaps (overhears), search warrants and arrest warrants.
Illinois Speedy Trial Case Law
Ill Sup Ct - Criminal - DUI / Speedy Trial Act People v. Sandoval , No. 106496 (2d Dist. Jan. 22, 2010) KARMEIER (DuPage Co.) Appellate court reversed in part.Defendant charged with multiple traffic offenses, including 3 DUI counts, from 3 separate traffic stops, and filed form document speedy trial demand, noting as charge pending "DuPage County DUI", but without specifying to which case demand applied. Defendant not brought to trial on any charge within 160 days, and then filed 2 motions to dismiss charges, which were granted. Under facts of case, this Defendant's demand was insufficient to commence running of speedy-trial term. Defendant demanding speedy trial under Section 3-8-10 must specify charges to which demand pertains, by case number or other adequate indicia of identification such as name of charge and date of offense, where multiple charges pending.
A little information about your drivers license
Suspended & Revoked Illinois Driver's License
The Office of the Illinois Secretary of State can suspend or revoke your driver’s license for many different reasons. Some of these are:
if you are over age 21, and are convicted of any 3 moving violations committed during a single year;
if you are under age 21, and are convicted of any 2 moving violations committed during two full years;
if you have repeatedly been involved in traffic accidents;
if you have been convicted of leaving the scene of an accident;
if you have been convicted of driving without insurance;
if you have failed to pay traffic fines you were previously ordered to pay by the courts;
if you have previously failed to appear in traffic court as required;
if you have been convicted of underage consumption or possession of alcohol; and
if you have been convicted of DUI.
These are just a few of the reasons your driver’s license can be suspended or revoked. If your license currently is suspended, or if you received notice from the Office of the Illinois Secretary of State that your license is going to be suspended soon I may be able to help. This office works with both residents and non-residents of Illinois in resolving license issues and will review your driving record with you and develop a strategy that could very quickly get you back on the road.
For more information check out the links in one of the blogs above.
The Office of the Illinois Secretary of State can suspend or revoke your driver’s license for many different reasons. Some of these are:
if you are over age 21, and are convicted of any 3 moving violations committed during a single year;
if you are under age 21, and are convicted of any 2 moving violations committed during two full years;
if you have repeatedly been involved in traffic accidents;
if you have been convicted of leaving the scene of an accident;
if you have been convicted of driving without insurance;
if you have failed to pay traffic fines you were previously ordered to pay by the courts;
if you have previously failed to appear in traffic court as required;
if you have been convicted of underage consumption or possession of alcohol; and
if you have been convicted of DUI.
These are just a few of the reasons your driver’s license can be suspended or revoked. If your license currently is suspended, or if you received notice from the Office of the Illinois Secretary of State that your license is going to be suspended soon I may be able to help. This office works with both residents and non-residents of Illinois in resolving license issues and will review your driving record with you and develop a strategy that could very quickly get you back on the road.
For more information check out the links in one of the blogs above.
Useful Lake County Illinois Law Links
Here are some law related links which readers might find useful:
Illinois Court Resources
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois
Circuit Court of Cook County
List of Illinois Circuit Court Websites
Illinois Supreme Court Rules
Illinois Supreme Court Opinions
Illinois Appellate Court Opinions
Illinois Legislature
Drivers' Resources
Illinois Secretary of State
Illinois Criminal and Traffic Laws
Illinois Criminal Code
Illinois DUI Statute
Illinois Vehicle Code
Illinois Controlled Substances Laws
Illinois Cannabis Control Act
Illinois Juvenile Court Act
Illinois Court Resources
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois
Circuit Court of Cook County
List of Illinois Circuit Court Websites
Illinois Supreme Court Rules
Illinois Supreme Court Opinions
Illinois Appellate Court Opinions
Illinois Legislature
Drivers' Resources
Illinois Secretary of State
Illinois Criminal and Traffic Laws
Illinois Criminal Code
Illinois DUI Statute
Illinois Vehicle Code
Illinois Controlled Substances Laws
Illinois Cannabis Control Act
Illinois Juvenile Court Act
New law from the courts:
Criminal - Search and SeizureU.S. v. Mitten, No. 09-1758 (1/20/10). Appeal, C.D. Ill. Affirmed.In prosecution on drug distribution charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress drugs seized from home of defendant's girlfriend, even though Dist. Ct. also found that affidavit supporting search warrant failed to establish probable cause. Dist. Ct. could properly rely on good faith exception to exclusionary rule where affidavit, which contained some evidence suggesting existence of drug sale activity at girlfriend's house, was not so lacking in probable cause that officer executing search warrant could not have believed that warrant was valid.
Criminal - Search and SeizureU.S. v. Mitten, No. 09-1758 (1/20/10). Appeal, C.D. Ill. Affirmed.In prosecution on drug distribution charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress drugs seized from home of defendant's girlfriend, even though Dist. Ct. also found that affidavit supporting search warrant failed to establish probable cause. Dist. Ct. could properly rely on good faith exception to exclusionary rule where affidavit, which contained some evidence suggesting existence of drug sale activity at girlfriend's house, was not so lacking in probable cause that officer executing search warrant could not have believed that warrant was valid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)