2013 IL App (2d) 110953
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- Butorac was convicted of operating a watercraft while intoxicated after a boat stop on the Fox River pursuant to 625 ILCS 45/2-2(a).
- Officers conducted routine safety checks during a systematic boat patrol, inspecting registration and safety equipment on multiple vessels.
- Butorac’s stop occurred after 20–25 prior stops; officers hailed his unmarked boat, identified themselves, and inspected items from the operator’s seated position.
- The agreed facts showed Butorac was not acting suspicious; the stop was solely under section 2-2(a) and did not rely on probable cause or reasonable suspicion at the outset.
- The trial court denied the motion to quash and suppress; on reconsideration, the court reaffirmed the constitutionality given the state’s boating-safety interests.
- On appeal, the issue focused on whether the statute, as applied, violated the Fourth Amendment, with the majority concluding the intrusion was minimal and supported by safety concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 2-2(a) stop was constitutionally reasonable as applied | People: safety interest outweighs minimal intrusion | Butorac: stop shows unbridled discretion and unconstitutional as applied | Yes; stop was reasonable and minimally intrusive |
| Whether the stop could be sustained absent a fixed waterway checkpoint | People: regular, systematic patrol limited discretion and supported by police procedure | Butorac: no limitations shown; no viable alternative; ongoing discretion invalid | Yes; analysis balanced public safety against intrusion; no need for fixed checkpoint |
Key Cases Cited
- Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40 (1968) (reasonable search may be justified under Fourth Amendment even if not authorized by statute)
- United States v. Cartwright, 630 F.3d 610 (7th Cir. 2010) (statutory authorization does not automatically render a seizure reasonable)
- People v. Garvin, 219 Ill. 2d 104 (2006) (as-applied challenges require balancing law and facts; prima facie burden shifts to State)
- Illinois v. McArthur, 531 U.S. 326 (2001) (brief, targeted seizures must be justified under Fourth Amendment exceptions)
- People v. Wells, 241 Ill. App. 3d 141 (1993) (safety checkpoints analogous to limited intrusions for vehicle safety)
- Bartley v. Illinois, 109 Ill. 2d 273 (1985) (balancing public interest against intrusion; minimal objective and subjective intrusion)
- Villamonte-Marquez, 462 U.S. 579 (1983) (waterfront vessel inspections and differing feasibility of fixed checkpoints vs. roving patrols)
- Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979) (suspicionless road checks were unconstitutional absent specific justification)
- Lidster, 540 U.S. 419 (2004) (highway checkpoints may serve public safety with controlled intrusion)
- Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976) (permanent checkpoints near border permissible under certain interests)
- Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 (1975) (roving-patrol stops require justification; broad discretion risks constitutional violation)
- Schenekl v. State, 30 S.W.3d 412 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (waterway safety checks and practical considerations for boat checkpoints)