People v. Bradley
943 N.E.2d 759
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Bradley was convicted of two counts of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance after an overheard drug transaction was admitted at trial.
- The State used a court-authorized overhear recording obtained via an informant microphone during a controlled purchase.
- Bradley challenged the admissibility of the overhear, arguing it violated 725 ILCS 5/108A-7 and the overhear order.
- The trial court found substantial compliance with the overhear order and admitted the edited recording (only 8B) after questioning foundation.
- Bradley preserved the issue by objections at trial and a posttrial motion; the appellate court reviews de novo and for abuse of discretion where relevant evidence is concerned.
- The appellate court affirmed, holding the State’s procedure substantially complied with the statute and the overhear order; the recording was admissible.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the overhear recording complies with 108A-7 and the overhear order | Bradley argues noncompliance with 108A-7(a)-(b) and the order | People contend substantial compliance | Admissible: substantial compliance with statute and order |
| Whether the use of a copied/editing version (8B) preserves integrity of the original | Bradley contends a copy of a copy risks manipulation | State asserts no substantive alteration and identification is valid | Admissible: recording preserved and authentic for trial |
| Whether destruction of the original overhear violated 108A-7(b) requirements | Bradley asserts original not preserved and review was improper | State shows proper procedures and review occurred; destruction explained | Admissible: not necessary to preserve the literal original; safeguards satisfied |
| Whether notice to Bradley under 108A-8(a) was satisfied by discovery notice | Bradley argues inadequate notice increased risk of suppression | Notice given via discovery procedures satisfied | Admissible: notice satisfied under Ellis rationale |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Nieves, 92 Ill.2d 452 (1982) (post-interception safeguards and abuses test applied)
- United States v. McLee, 436 F.3d 751 (7th Cir. 2006) (origins of original recording concept and editing risk)
- People v. Ellis, 122 Ill.App.3d 900 (4th Dist. 1984) (notice/sufficiency considerations under 108A-8(a))
- People v. Mason, 403 Ill.App.3d 1048 (2d Dist. 2010) (trial court findings on chain of custody and authenticity entitled to deference)
- O'Dell v. Illinois, 84 Ill.App.3d 359 (5th Dist. 1980) (waiver analysis for suppression under 108A-9)
- United States v. Phillips, 596 F.3d 414 (7th Cir. 2010) (redacted recording admission not error where no basis for exclusion)