In re B.C.P., 2012 IL App (3d) 100921

In June 2010 the State filed a petition under the Juvenile Court Act seeking to adjudicate 13-year-old B.C.P. as a delinquent ward.
B.C.P. moved to suppress an inculpatory statement made to a police officer and a child protection worker; a hearing was held and the trial court granted suppression.
The State filed a certificate of impairment and appealed the suppression ruling on an interlocutory basis.
The State argued Rule 604(a)(1) is incorporated into juvenile proceedings through Rule 660(a) to allow interlocutory review.
B.C.P. argued Rule 660(a) covers final judgments and Rule 662 governs limited interlocutory appeals; neither provision supports this appeal here.
The appellate court dismissed the interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction, concluding the suppression order was not appealable under Rule 660(a) or Rule 662.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the State may appeal a suppression order in a juvenile case	State: Rule 604(a)(1) incorporated via Rule 660(a) grants interlocutory appeal.	B.C.P.: Rule 660(a) covers final judgments; Rule 662's limited interlocutory ground is not met; no jurisdiction.	No jurisdiction; appeal must be dismissed.

In re Olivia C., 371 Ill. App. 3d 473 (2007) (interlocutory appeal limitations in juvenile cases)
In re Hershberger, 132 Ill. App. 3d 332 (1985) (interlocutory appeals in juvenile proceedings)
In re J.N., 91 Ill. 2d 122 (1982) (jurisdiction to review interlocutory appeals in juvenile cases)
In re A.M., 94 Ill. App. 3d 86 (1981) (rules governing juvenile delinquency appeals)
People v. Brooks, 187 Ill. 2d 91 (1999) (final judgments; suppression orders not final judgments)
People v. Martin, 67 Ill. 2d 462 (1977) (discussion of Rule 604(1) applicability in juvenile context)
People v. DeJesus, 127 Ill. 2d 486 (1989) (treatment of Rule 604(1) applicability in juvenile context)
In re K.E.F., 235 Ill. 2d 530 (2009) (role of Rule 660(a) and Rule 604(1) in juvenile appeals)