People v. Cregan
2011 IL App (4th) 100477
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Defendant was arrested November 3, 2009 at a train station on an active civil warrant for failing to pay child support and as a known gang member; officers conducted an inventory/search of luggage in defendant’s immediate control while he was handcuffed.
- Two bags were not locked and were kept by officers after arrest; a female companion approached but luggage was not released to her until after search.
- A container of hair gel inside the main bag contained cocaine; officers opened the gel container and found cocaine totaling 9.77 grams.
- Trial court found bags under defendant’s control during arrest and that searching them first was necessary for officer safety given the risk of weapon in bag; search occurred at the station and in defendant’s presence.
- Defendant confessed to possession of cocaine during a taped interview; substance found in hair gel was stipulated as cocaine; court found unlawful possession of less than 15 grams and sentenced defendant to 5.5 years.
- On appeal, defendant argues the search was not proper as a search incident to arrest nor an inventory search; issue is whether the search complied with Fourth Amendment and related Illinois law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the luggage search a valid search incident to arrest? | Cregan | Cregan | Yes; search held valid. |
| Did the scope of the search extend beyond weapon-detection, including the hair gel container? | Cregan | Cregan | No; search was broad enough. |
| Does inventory-search doctrine apply and was Collins entitled to possession release? | People | Cregan | Inventory search applicable; release issue not dispositive. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969) (defines immediate control for searches incident to arrest; weapon/evidence rationale)
- United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973) (full search of arrestee allowed; area of immediate control included)
- United States v. Chadwick, 433 U.S. 1 (1977) (search of luggage not within incident-to-arrest when under exclusive control; requires proximity to arrestee)
- Hoskins v. State, 101 Ill. 2d 209 (1984) (distinguishes purses from footlockers; items immediately associated with person may be searched)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (2009) (limits vehicle searches incident to arrest when arrestee cannot access vehicle area; narrow applicability to cars)
- People v. Gipson, 203 Ill. 2d 298 (2003) (inventory search standard; reasonableness of police procedures)