Schedule a Free Consultation|
Call 815-740-4025
-
- Home
- Our Firm
- Criminal Defense
- Assault & Battery
- Domestic Battery / Domestic Violence
- DUI/DWI
- Drug Crimes
- Driver's License Reinstatement
- Speeding Tickets, Traffic Offenses & Violations
- CDL Violations
- Gun & Weapons Charges
- Felony Crimes
- Misdemeanor Crimes
- Juvenile Crimes
- Expungement & Record Sealing
- Resisting Arrest / Obstructing the Police
- Retail Theft & Shoplifting
- Police Questioning: When Miranda Warnings Are Required
- Media
- Blog
- Contact
Recent Blog Posts
Opioid Addiction and the Nation’s Drug Problem
Opioid-based medication has been available to the American public since before the Civil War, but recently, these types of drugs have skyrocketed to the forefront of Americans’ attention. Law enforcement and government officials have gone so far as to declare the opioid abuse a national epidemic, and if arrest rates and overdose numbers are any indication, there are no signs that an end to the problem is in sight.
Morphine was originally used to treat soldiers’ battle wounds, and in 1898, heroin became commercially available. "They are effective pain relievers, and that's what they were being used for. There weren't many other options." Says Kimberly Johnson, director of the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment at the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. By the 1920s, health care professionals were becoming increasingly concerned about the addictive properties of opioids and started prescribing them less. Heroin was made illegal in the United States in 1924.
Navigating the Juvenile Court System in Illinois
The first juvenile court was established in Cook County in 1899. Since then the juvenile justice system has seen a number of changes to better serve minors who are charged with crimes.
What is the Purpose of the Illinois Juvenile Court System?
When the state of Illinois enacted the Juvenile Court Act of 1987, it attempted to set clear goals for the juvenile justice system to meets the needs of minors who are charged with crimes. At its core, the stated purpose of the act is to:
- Secure the care and guidance to serve the safety and moral, emotional, mental and physical welfare of the minor, preferably in his or her own home.
- Serve the best interests of the community.
- Preserve and strengthen the minor’s family ties, whenever possible.
- Remove the minor from the custody of his or her parents when the safety or welfare of the minor, or protection of the community, cannot be adequately safeguarded.
Repeat Gun Crime Offenders Face New Sentencing Guidelines in Illinois
It is no secret that the incidence of weapons violations in Chicago is high. Just last summer, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that more than 5,500 illegal guns were seized from January to September of 2016. The data reveals that law enforcement authorities are seizing more illegal guns in Chicago than anywhere else in the U.S.
Addressing this concern, last month Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed into law what is touted as new, tougher sentencing guidelines for repeat gun offenders.
Among those leading the push for stricter sentencing guidelines for repeat gun offenders were Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson. Johnson even spoke before the Senate’s Criminal Law Committee to encourage the changes, as Chicago experiences an era of record-setting gun violence and homicides. Both the Mayor and Police Superintendent advocated for the new, stricter sentencing guidelines to help police and prosecutors keep illegal guns and those who use them off the streets of the city. They see the move as one toward holding accountable for their actions those convicted of repeat gun crimes.
Appeals Court Upholds Drug-Induced Homicide Conviction
With all of the talk nationwide about criminal justice reform and alternatives to imprisonment for so-called “low-level” and non-violent offenders, it is understandable that the severity of certain drug crimes can be underestimated. Of course, in most such cases, the offenses in question tend to be simple possession or the possession of drug paraphernalia. Most people realize that other drug crimes—including possession with intent to deliver, manufacturing, and trafficking—are much more serious. Perhaps the most serious drug-related offense is known as drug-induced homicide and is, for all intents and purposes, tantamount to murder.
A case involving allegations of drug-induced homicide from 2012 was recently heard by an appellate court in Illinois. A three-judge panel upheld the trial court’s finding that the defendant had committed drug-induced homicide, despite being friends with the victim.
Distracted Driving. Will I Receive a Ticket?
Over the past several years, the state of Illinois has taken steps to reduce the occurrence of traffic accidents caused by drivers engaging in “distracted driving.” To most drivers distracted driving means talking on one’s cell phone while operating a vehicle, but in reality, distracted driving laws apply to several other activities.
According to the Illinois State Police, if a driver engages in any of the following activities, and as a result causes a traffic accident, he or she may face criminal charges and incarceration.
- Shaving or other grooming activities such as combing one’s hair or nail maintenance
- Texting or Emailing
- Tuning or adjusting the volume on the radio
- Reading and/or writing
- Eating, drinking, or smoking
- Applying makeup
- Arguing/fighting with passengers
- Adjusting contact lenses
- Picking up an item from the floor of the vehicle
- Reaching for the glove compartment
Even those activities that one would consider quite legal could cause a licensed driver to face charges under Illinois’s distracted driving statutes.
Illinois Case Raises Questions Regarding Urine Tests in DUI Cases
Over the last few years, there has been a great deal of discussion regarding implied consent laws and the ability of law enforcement to force a driver to submit to blood-alcohol content (BAC) testing. The issue is multifaceted, as with many subjects in the realm of criminal law, but the debate boiled down to two primary questions: Can police force a person to submit to BAC testing without a warrant when the person is arrested on suspicion of driving under influence ? If so, can that person be criminally prosecuted if he or she refuses a warrantless test? While the United States Supreme Court addressed these questions to a certain extent last year, a case in Illinois seems to have a found a loophole in the court’s ruling.
Birchfield v. North Dakota
Illinois—like every other state—maintains an implied consent law, which means that drivers who use the roads and highways in the state agree to submit to BAC testing if they are arrested on suspicion of DUI. Those who refuse are not subject to additional criminal penalties, but administrative penalties, including the suspension of driving privileges, do apply.
Common Misconceptions About Your Miranda Rights
If you have ever watched a crime-related television program, you know that most episodes end with a suspect in handcuffs and, as the screen fades to black, you can hear the arresting officer begin to say, “You have the right to remain silent.” Thanks to this type of depiction in entertainment, most people are aware of the series of statements known as Miranda rights—sometimes referred to as Miranda warnings. Unfortunately, however, there are many misunderstandings that persist about these warnings and the rights of a criminal suspect who has been placed under arrest.
What Are Your Miranda Rights?
The Miranda warnings trace back to a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case entitled Miranda v. Arizona. In that case, the suspect, Ernesto Miranda, was never informed of his constitutional right to an attorney and to avoid incriminating himself prior to being questioned by police. During a two-hour interrogation session with no lawyer present, Miranda confessed to the crimes of rape and kidnapping. The Supreme Court eventually overturned the conviction stating that suspects must be informed of certain constitutional rights before questioning or the results of the interrogation may not be admissible in court.
Determining a Defendant’s Fitness to Stand Trial
Illinois law presumes that a criminal defendant facing charges for assault or another crime is fit to be tried and receive a sentence. However, the law also recognizes that circumstances might render a defendant unable to comprehend the proceedings against him or to help with his own case. If the defendant has a mental or physical condition that raises a bona fide doubt regarding his fitness to stand trial, then the court will hold a hearing to determine the issue.
The fitness of the defendant can be highlighted by the defense, prosecution or the court any time before a plea is made or prior to or throughout the course of a trial. The defendant may request that a qualified professional examine his fitness. Once the defendant’s fitness has been brought into question, the prosecution is required to show (by a preponderance of the evidence) that the defendant is fit. However, the court may also conduct its own inquiry, including the calling of witnesses.
First-Time DUI Offenders Have Options under Illinois Law
Charges of driving under the influence are always serious. Intoxicated driving creates significant danger not only to the drunk driver, but to anyone else who may be sharing the road. As such, penalties for DUI can be severe, even for a first offense. However, in an effort to prevent future violations, provisions in Illinois may allow a first-time offender options to reduce some of the punitive and legal consequences.
Maximum Penalties
An individual convicted of DUI in Illinois for the first time faces a number of potential penalties. His or her driving privileges may be suspended for six months, and, if chemical testing was refused at the time of arrest, the suspension will be enforced for one year. In addition to license suspension, a conviction also carries up to one year in prison and $2,500 in fines, not including court costs and other fees. A first DUI offense also remains on the driver’s record, adding to the potential penalties of future convictions.
Illinois Governor Signs Bail Reform Measure
If you were to ask several random people to list the top three current problems with our criminal justice system, there is a good chance that many of the respondents would include overcrowded jails and prisons in their list. The concern over the nation’s large prison population is certainly founded in truth, and while the issue exists nationwide, taking action to remedy the problem falls largely to each individual state. Earlier this month, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed a bill that is designed to lower the state’s incarceration numbers. The new law promises to reduce the number of criminal suspects who are forced to sit in jail and wait for a trial simply because they cannot afford to post bail.
Bipartisan Cooperation
For many Illinois residents, the cooperation between Republicans and Democrats on the issue of criminal justice reform was welcome and refreshing. “We, as the people of Illinois, can agree (this) is a fair way to address…things that are not done fairly,” said Democratic Senator Donne Trotter of Chicago. Republican House Minority Leader Jim Durkin of Western Springs agreed, “I think it’s important, it’s right, it’s fair, and it’s important for our society.” Durkin also commented that the bill is “tough on crime but also smart on crime.”
