2019 IL App (4th) 170064
Ill. App. Ct.2019Background
- Defendant Robert W. Eyler Jr. was charged with unlawful possession of methamphetamine after officers found a drinking straw with white residue on his person during a search incident to arrest. The residue tested positive for methamphetamine.
- Police were dispatched after a citizen called to report “a male subject wearing a blue sweatshirt who was on a bicycle who was yelling profanities and just acting erratically.”
- Officer Summers observed a man matching the description on a bicycle, attempted to stop him, and the man fled by bicycle and then on foot through yards; other officers pursued, identified themselves, and ultimately surrounded and detained him.
- Officers recovered a wallet, a metal pipe, green leafy material, and a straw with white residue from defendant during a search after arrest; defendant presented no evidence at trial and was convicted by a jury and sentenced to five years.
- On appeal defendant raised (1) ineffective assistance for failure to file a suppression motion, (2) that a Terry stop requires reasonable suspicion of an ongoing (not completed) crime, and (3) errors in fines and fees imposed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failing to file a motion to suppress | Counsel not ineffective because the stop, flight, and arrest were lawful; suppression motion would be meritless | Counsel was deficient for not moving to suppress the search evidence arising from the stop/arrest | Affirmed: counsel not ineffective; the tip corroboration + unprovoked flight provided lawful basis for stop and arrest, so suppression motion would not have been meritorious |
| Whether Terry stops require suspicion of an ongoing (not completed) crime | Terry permits stops based on reasonable, articulable suspicion that a person committed or is about to commit a crime; Navarette did not create a per se rule limiting Terry to ongoing crimes | Terry should be limited to ongoing criminal activity; Navarette supports that view | Affirmed: Navarette does not abrogate precedent; Illinois law permits investigatory stops based on suspicion of past, ongoing, or imminent criminal activity (Thomas and other Illinois authority control) |
| Trial court errors in fines and fees | Appellate court should not address because trial court retains jurisdiction to correct errors under Supreme Court Rule 472 | Errors in fines/fees require reversal or correction on appeal | Declined to address on appeal; trial court retains jurisdiction under Ill. S. Ct. R. 472 to correct fines/fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (establishes investigatory stop standard requiring reasonable, articulable suspicion)
- Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (flight and evasive behavior are relevant factors for reasonable suspicion)
- Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. 393 (911 tip reliability and discussion of ongoing crime vs. past recklessness)
- United States v. Hensley, 469 U.S. 221 (Terry stop may investigate involvement in a completed felony)
- People v. Thomas, 198 Ill. 2d 103 (Ill. S. Ct.; unprovoked flight can convert otherwise ungrounded suspicion into reasonable suspicion justifying a stop)
- People v. Luedemann, 222 Ill. 2d 530 (distinguishes consensual encounters, Terry stops, and arrests; articulable-suspicion standard)
- People v. Cregan, 2014 IL 113600 (search incident to a valid arrest; suppression standards)
- People v. Johnson, 408 Ill. App. 3d 107 (flight from lawful Terry stop can give probable cause to arrest for obstructing a peace officer)