People v. Lubienski
2016 IL App (3d) 150813
Ill. App. Ct.2016Background
- Defendant Mark P. Lubienski was charged with DUI after Officer Lawrence Drish stopped his truck around 1:08 a.m. on Nov. 16, 2013.
- Drish observed the truck’s passenger tires briefly cross the white fog line and touch the gravel shoulder while making a right turn; no further violations occurred.
- Drish noted bloodshot/glassy eyes, slurred speech, and a strong odor of alcohol; field sobriety tests were administered and defendant was arrested.
- No motion to quash arrest or suppress evidence was filed at trial; defendant was convicted in a bench trial and given 12 months’ court supervision.
- On appeal defendant argued counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress, contending the investigatory stop lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion.
- The trial court’s video recording of the stop was admitted; the appellate court reviewed whether the initial stop was lawful under the reasonable-suspicion standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of investigatory stop (reasonable, articulable suspicion) | Drish had reasonable suspicion because defendant crossed the fog line, violating 11-709(a) | Crossing the fog line was justified by right-turn rule (11-801(a)(1)) or otherwise did not support a stop | Held: stop lawful — deviation from lane (crossing fog line) provided reasonable, articulable suspicion |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to file motion to quash/suppress | No reasonable probability motion would succeed because stop was supported by reasonable suspicion | Counsel ineffective because failure to move deprived defendant of suppression opportunity | Held: counsel not ineffective — defendant failed to show motion would likely have been granted or changed outcome |
| Relevance of probable cause vs reasonable suspicion | Prosecutor: only reasonable, articulable suspicion needed for stop (Hackett and related precedent) | Defendant: stop lacked sufficient basis; probable-cause discussion might be necessary | Held: unnecessary to decide probable cause; reasonable, articulable suspicion alone sufficed for investigatory stop |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Colon, 225 Ill. 2d 125 (explains test for ineffective assistance based on failure to file suppression motion)
- People v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407 (ineffective-assistance principles reaffirmed)
- People v. McDonough, 239 Ill. 2d 260 (discusses standards for stops and relation of reasonable suspicion to probable cause)
- People v. Gonzalez, 204 Ill. 2d 220 (traffic-stop reasonableness principles)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 (Supreme Court: reasonable, articulable suspicion suffices for investigative stops)