People v. Day
67 N.E.3d 607
Ill. App. Ct.2017Background
- Police officer Daniel Lopez stopped Anthony Day at ~3:00 a.m. for excessive exhaust noise; Lopez observed no unsafe driving or traffic violations and two passengers were in the car.
- Lopez detected a strong odor of alcohol from Day, who later admitted drinking beer earlier that night and estimated he stopped ~30 minutes before the stop.
- Lopez administered HGN, one-leg stand, and walk-and-turn tests; he later acknowledged the one-leg and walk-and-turn were administered on wet/rainy pavement and conceded those tests are invalid if given in rain or on wet surfaces.
- Lopez reported two clues on the one-leg stand (swaying, putting foot down once) and four clues on the walk-and-turn (including not touching heel-to-toe, not counting aloud, and an improper turn); Day otherwise performed the tasks without stumbling or using arms for balance.
- The trial court rescinded Day’s statutory summary suspension, granted his motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence, finding Lopez lacked probable cause to arrest because (1) field sobriety tests were improperly administered and (2) other indicia (odor, bloodshot/glassy eyes, alleged slurred speech) did not, alone, establish probable cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer had probable cause to arrest for DUI | Lopez’s observations (strong odor of alcohol, admission of drinking, bloodshot/glassy eyes, slurred speech, failures on field sobriety tests) supported probable cause | Field sobriety tests were administered improperly (rain/wet surface) and, together with the otherwise safe driving and minimal test clues, do not establish probable cause | No probable cause; arrest quashed and evidence suppressed |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Jones, 215 Ill. 2d 261 (deference to trial court factual findings; probable-cause review de novo)
- People v. Wear, 229 Ill. 2d 545 (probable cause requires facts that would lead a reasonably cautious person to believe a crime was committed)
- People v. Briseno, 343 Ill. App. 3d 953 (invalid field-sobriety test results may be disregarded when tests not properly administered)
- People v. Hires, 396 Ill. App. 3d 315 (weight of field-sobriety evidence vs. need for NHTSA-standard administration)
- People v. McKown, 236 Ill. 2d 278 (consumption of alcohol is relevant to impairment inquiry)
- People v. Wingren, 167 Ill. App. 3d 313 (officer observations of odor/red/glassy eyes typically supplemented by driving or other indicia to establish probable cause)