People v. Horine
92 N.E.3d 523
Ill. App. Ct.2018Background
- In Oct. 2016 Alex Horine was arrested for DUI; officer reported Horine refused or failed to complete chemical testing and issued a sworn report describing indicia of intoxication and a single-car collision.
- The Secretary of State issued a statutory summary suspension of Horine’s driving privileges (three years because not first offender).
- Horine filed a petition to rescind the statutory summary suspension arguing, among other things, the arresting officer lacked reasonable grounds to believe he was driving under the influence.
- At the rescission hearing, the State attempted to elicit testimony from Officer Cunningham about what a witness (Kaylie) told him at the scene; defense objected as hearsay and the court sustained the objection.
- The court also excluded a surveillance video for lack of foundation; the trial court granted Horine’s petition.
- The State moved to reconsider arguing that out-of-court witness statements are admissible at rescission/probable-cause hearings to show the officer’s state of mind and investigatory basis; the trial court denied reconsideration. The appellate court affirmed on forfeiture grounds but held the trial court erred in sustaining the hearsay objection.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a non-testifying witness’s out-of-court statement to an arresting officer is admissible at a statutory summary suspension (rescission) hearing to show the officer’s knowledge and reasonableness | Statements admissible to explain officer’s investigatory steps and to show effect on officer’s state of mind (thus not hearsay) | Statements are hearsay and inadmissible; State sought truth of matter asserted | Court: Such testimony is permissible at rescission/probable-cause hearings because it explains what the officer knew and why he acted; but State forfeited the argument below, so appellate court affirmed on forfeiture |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Wear, 229 Ill. 2d 545 (Ill. 2008) (probable cause analysis uses totality of circumstances and reasonable-person standard)
- People v. Patterson, 192 Ill. 2d 93 (Ill. 2000) (hearsay admissible at suppression/rescission hearings to show officer’s state of knowledge)
- People v. Cameron, 189 Ill. App. 3d 998 (Ill. App. Ct. 1989) (officer may testify to investigatory steps but not the substantive content of statements by nontestifying witnesses)