People v. Colyar
2013 IL 111835
| Ill. | 2013Background
- Officers in plain clothes approached an idling car blocking a motel entrance at dusk; three occupants were in the vehicle. The initial approach was undisputedly lawful.
- Detective Johnson noticed a plastic bag in the center console; Officer Alcott shined a flashlight and observed a large live bullet in plain view.
- Officers ordered all three occupants out, handcuffed them, retrieved five rounds from the console and one round from Colyar’s pocket, then conducted a protective search of the passenger compartment and found a .454 revolver under the passenger floor mat.
- Colyar moved to suppress the bullets and handgun; the trial court initially admitted bullets but suppressed the gun, then on reconsideration suppressed all evidence for lack of probable cause; the appellate court affirmed suppression (majority) on probable-cause grounds.
- The State appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court arguing the officers had reasonable suspicion under Terry and Michigan v. Long to conduct protective searches for weapons; the Illinois Supreme Court reversed and held the searches were reasonable for officer safety.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Colyar) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers could escalate a lawful Terry encounter to detain, handcuff, frisk occupants and search vehicle after seeing a bullet in plain view | Bullet in plain view gave reasonable suspicion that occupants were armed and dangerous, justifying protective searches under Terry and Long | A single visible bullet, without more, does not establish reasonable suspicion of criminal activity; officers should have asked about FOID or otherwise confirmed legality before seizing/searching | Yes. The Court held the bullet and context gave officers reasonable suspicion of present danger; protective searches and the vehicle sweep were reasonable under Terry/Long |
| Whether handcuffing converted the Terry stop into an arrest requiring probable cause | Handcuffing was reasonably necessary given officers were outnumbered, it was dusk, and ammunition was immediately accessible | Handcuffing transformed the encounter into an arrest; without probable cause the subsequent vehicle search was unlawful | No. Court held handcuffing did not automatically convert the stop into an arrest given the circumstances and was permissible here |
| Whether officers were required to ask about a FOID card or otherwise establish legality of ammunition possession before searching | Officer safety, not proof of illegality, governs protective searches; Terry does not require eliminating lawful explanations before protecting themselves | Officers should have inquired about lawful possession (FOID) before escalating or searching | No. Court rejected requirement to first confirm lawful possession; safety-based reasonable suspicion sufficed |
| Admissibility of bullets and handgun recovered after the protective searches | Seizures were justified and evidence is admissible | Evidence was fruit of unlawful arrest/search and should be suppressed | Evidence admissible; judgments suppressing evidence reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (approving brief investigative stops and limited weapon frisk when officer has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and danger)
- Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983) (extending Terry to permit limited protective search of a vehicle passenger compartment when officer reasonably believes occupant is dangerous and may access weapons)
- Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323 (2009) (reaffirming that stop-and-frisk requires reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot before a frisk)
- Adams v. Williams, 407 U.S. 143 (1972) (noting protective searches for weapons may be reasonable for officer safety even if weapon possession is not itself illegal)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (discussing scope of vehicle searches incident to arrest and distinguishing Long’s safety-based protective-sweep rationale)