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
The Burden of Proof in a Criminal Case
When an individual has been charged with a crime, he or she is presumed to be innocent until he or she is proven guilty in a court of law. In a criminal case, the burden of proof is the highest in any area of the law, and justifiably so. Other areas of law deal primarily with concerns related to money and property, but a criminal defendant often faces serious punitive consequences, including, in some states, the death penalty. While capital punishment is no longer used in Illinois, a criminal conviction can still change a person’s life forever. The standard of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt looks to ensure that only the truly guilty are convicted and subsequently punished.
The Government’s Role
News stories and television programs often make reference to the idea that the victim of a crime can press charges against the alleged perpetrator. This, however, is only partially true. It is possible for a victim to file a police report and to cooperate in the prosecution of an alleged offender, but it is up to the government to decide whether or not to actually pursue a conviction. Depending on the nature of the offense, the prosecution may be handled by a United States Attorney in federal court or by the State’s Attorney’s office in the appropriate Illinois county.
DUI Charges and Delayed Intoxication
If you are not normally a drinker and recently went out with friends, you may have found yourself in an unfortunate circumstance—a delayed sense of intoxication that ultimately resulted in a DUI charge. What is this phenomenon, though, and why is it important?
What is Delayed Intoxication?
Delayed intoxication is exactly what the phrase implies: an individual who has consumed alcohol does not immediately feel the effects of the alcohol but later realizes they are more intoxicated than they initially though. Delayed intoxication could happen if your tolerance for alcohol has changed because of age or weight loss or due to other factors, such as how much food you ate before you started drinking. If you at home, a friend’s house, or an establishment when the alcohol catches up with you, it is unlikely to matter all that much. On the other hand, if you start to feel the effects while you are behind the wheel, you could be in for some trouble.
Reasonable Suspicion and DUI Charges
Consider any traffic stop in which you have ever been involved. Even in a simple stop for something such as a broken tail light, this formality is a form of a seizure, which is addressed the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. When a stop is performed without just and reasonable suspicion, any charges that follow may be deemed unconstitutional and be dismissed, even in cases involving DUI. However, obtaining this outcome often depends on favorable circumstances coupled with a knowledgeable attorney who has the ability to use them to your advantage.
The Fourth Amendment
The Fourth Amendment protects citizens against unlawful searches and seizures—including arrests—and requires a court-issued warrant even in cases with probable cause. However, a loophole exists in which if the officer believes the driver or general public are in danger, a warrantless stop is permissible. Reasonably suspicious activities are not clear-cut or defined for law enforcement officers, offering ambiguity that allows an officer to use his or her judgment given the present circumstances. If the stop is improper, the stop itself and any resulting evidence are challengeable. Possible concerns include:
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Illinois Concealed Carry Appeal
The state of Illinois has long been known for its strict laws regarding the ownership of firearms and other issues related to weapons. In fact, Illinois was the last state in the nation to even create a process for issuing concealed carry permits, doing so in 2012 only after a federal appeals court found that the state’s prohibition of concealed carry permits violated the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The issue has been back in the news in recent months as several Illinois gun owners have claimed the current process for obtaining a concealed carry permit violates their rights to due process.
Federal Appeals Court Rules Upholds Current System
Last spring, the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments regarding lawsuits filed by gun owners who believed the state’s laws regarding concealed carry permits violated their constitutional rights. The plaintiffs claimed that they met all of the qualifications to be issued a concealed carry permit under Illinois law, but their permits were not issued due to objections that had been lodged with one or more law enforcement agencies. When the applicants sought additional information, they were denied. They each filed lawsuits citing a deficiency in due process.
Illinois Criminal Law Reform Aims to Reduce Recidivism Rates
Earlier this year, Governor Bruce Rauner announced a lofty goal: he wants to reduce the state’s prison population by 25 percent by the year 2025. Several initiatives and criminal law reform laws have been put into place since that announcement, and all are aimed at achieving that goal. Is it really working, though, or do they at least have the potential of doing so? The following explores the recent reforms, and their potential efficacy. It also provides some important information for anyone currently facing criminal charges in the state of Illinois.
Diversion Programs and Nonviolent Crimes
Over the last several decades, the “War on Drugs” created a major surge in the number of people arrested for nonviolent crimes, and it continues to result in countless arrests. Worse yet is that many wind up being arrested, charged, and convicted of subsequent crimes. This is often because the true nature of their issue is never really addressed (i.e. addiction, etc.).
DUI Checkpoints: Are They Constitutional?
As we begin the winter holiday season, you will probably start to see reports of DUI checkpoints being set up throughout the Chicago region. Beginning with the night before Thanksgiving and continuing through New Year’s Day, these checkpoints are designed to be a deterrent for drunk drivers and to get those who are intoxicated off the roads. Many people, however, come to me with questions about the legality of DUI checkpoints and whether they violate the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
Important Questions
More than a quarter century ago, the issue was taken before the highest court in the country. The case began with a challenge by residents in Saginaw County, Michigan, who believed that being required to stop at a DUI checkpoint was a violation of their Fourth Amendment rights. The plaintiffs claimed that being detained, even for a couple minutes, constituted a seizure of their personal property—their vehicles—which could eventually become an arrest on DUI charges.
Asset Forfeiture Has Become a Police For-Profit Business in Illinois
In the state of Illinois, there is a little-known law that can leave those suspected of, arrested for, charged with, or convicted of a crime in a serious financial bind. Even worse is that law enforcement is often profiting from their misfortunes. The statute regarding civil forfeiture may allow the police to seize your assets and personal belongings, even if you are never convicted of a crime.
Civil Forfeiture – What Is It, and How Might It Affect You?
State and federal laws permit law enforcement to seize any land, cash, vehicle, or property that could be tied to a crime or illegal activity. The police and other law enforcement agencies are not required to verify that the property belongs to the suspected individual, nor do the laws require that the suspected person be charged (let alone convicted) of a crime to seize or withhold that property from its rightful owner.
In fact, a grandmother from Rock Island County had her Jeep Compass seized when her grandson was arrested for allegedly driving on a revoked license. The grandmother was not an accessory, and she argued that she did not know that her grandson had been driving on a revoked license. Yet law enforcement refused to return her vehicle, stating it had been used in the commission of a crime. She is not alone.
Criminal Trends and Common Juvenile Offenses
In the realm of criminal law, the word “juvenile” is used to describe suspects and offenders under the age of eighteen. Juveniles are responsible for a large number of everyday offenses, often taking place in our schools, on our streets, and in our neighborhood establishments. Similar to adult crimes, juvenile crimes can include everything from minor scuffles with another young person to more serious assault charges to underage drinking and much more. Many juvenile offenses, however, go unreported, making it difficult to resolve many cases, and even more difficult to collect proper data for statistical purposes.
Observed Trends
While unreported juvenile offenses make it more difficult to get a complete picture of the problem, there are still distinct trends that have been observed over time, revealing certain patterns in activity among youth offenders. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention reports the following:
- Juvenile offenses are not always minor. - While it is true that many juvenile crimes are minor in nature, many others are life-altering for both the offenders and victims. Homicide and other violent crimes, such as sexual and aggravated assault, as well as robbery are all prevalent among juvenile offenders. The U.S. Department of Justice reports that over 600 murders in the year 2014 alone included juvenile involvement.
Man Spends Five Months in Jail Unaware of $2 Bail
When a person is arrested on suspicion of criminal charges , he or she has certain rights that must be protected. Of course, a criminal defendant has the right to remain silent and the right to due process. He or she also has the right to be fully informed about the processes that lie ahead. In most cases, another fundamental right—the right to a qualified attorney—will allow the defendant to remain fully informed about the criminal proceedings and what is expected of him or her along the way. But when there is a breakdown in communication between the attorney and the suspect, things can go very wrong, as a Queens man recently learned after sitting in jail for five months on bail that was less than the cost of a slice of New York-style pizza.
A Confusing Situation
In November of 2014, an Algerian-born man living in Queens, NY, was arrested on several charges including assaulting the officer who was trying to arrest him. Bail was set at $25,000 on the police assault charge. A week later, when prosecutors failed to secure an indictment, the assault charge was dropped and the man was ordered released. There were, however, two minor charges still pending against him, with bail set for each at merely one dollar.
Understanding the Basics of the Sex Offender Registration Requirements in Illinois
Sexual offenses and sexual assault charges can have lasting and significant implications for those who are convicted. Not only do you stand to face jail time, fines, and a criminal record, it is also likely that you will have to register as a sex offender. Akin to wearing a scarlet letter, the ramifications of registering can follow you around for a lifetime. Learn what it means to register as a sex offender, and how you can best protect your reputation and future, with help from the following information.
Who Registers as a Sex Offender?
Anyone that has been convicted of “sex offense” must register as a sex offender. This can include crimes such as child pornography, criminal sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, and even sexual grooming of a minor child. However, not all criminal acts outlined in the Sex Offender Registration Act require you to engage in a sexual act. For example, you may also be required to register as a sex offender if you have received three convictions of public indecency, were found guilty of traveling to meet a minor with the intent to engage in a sexual act, or were found guilty of juvenile prostitution.
