2018 IL App (2d) 170135
Ill. App. Ct.2018Background
- On December 10, 2016, Officer Greyson Scott was dispatched to a Casey’s store after an employee reported a white Scion nearly drove into the building and the driver appeared intoxicated. The clerk identified the store and spoke with a sergeant.
- Scott arrived shortly thereafter, observed a white Scion in the parking lot, and saw a white male (Meo) enter and drive the vehicle onto a private frontage/exit way toward Plank Road.
- While passing Scott’s squad, Meo’s headlights briefly went off then back on; Scott followed Meo onto the public roadway, observed no traffic violations for ~30 seconds, then initiated a stop based on the tip and blinking headlights.
- At the stop Scott smelled alcohol, observed glassy/bloodshot eyes and slurred speech, and Meo admitted to drinking three beers six to seven hours earlier; Meo appeared to fumble his wallet and initially produced a credit card.
- Due to heavy snow, Scott moved Meo under an overhang to attempt standardized field sobriety testing; Meo reported a recent stroke and repeatedly had difficulty following HGN instructions and declined to perform standardized tests; he refused a breath test and asked to walk home.
- The trial court granted Meo’s motion to quash and suppress, finding no reasonable suspicion for the stop and insufficient probable cause for arrest. The State appealed. The appellate court reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the investigatory stop supported by reasonable suspicion? | The clerk’s contemporaneous call identifying vehicle, behavior (hitting curb, nearly entering store), and description (white Scion, white male) plus observed headlight blinking justified a Terry stop. | Tip was anonymous/insufficiently detailed; blinking headlights (on private property) were not a traffic violation and did not create suspicion. | Stop was supported by reasonable suspicion: tip was from an identifiable clerk and sufficiently reliable; blinking headlights corroborated the tip. |
| Was the arrest supported by probable cause for DUI? | Officer smelled alcohol, observed glassy/red eyes, slurred speech, fumbling with wallet, admission of drinking, and refusal of breath test — together these facts constituted probable cause. | Video and testimony showed competent driving, ability to walk, pick up keys, and perform some tasks; trial court found officer not credible on some observations. | Probable cause existed based on the totality of facts (odor, admission, appearance/speech, fumbling, refusal), so arrest was lawful. |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (establishes standard for investigatory stops)
- People v. Thomas, 198 Ill. 2d 103 (Ill. 2001) (facts viewed from officer’s perspective for reasonable suspicion)
- People v. Wear, 229 Ill. 2d 545 (Ill. 2008) (probable cause is based on totality of facts and everyday probabilities)
- People v. McKown, 236 Ill. 2d 278 (Ill. 2010) (evidence of alcohol consumption is relevant to impairment)
- Village of Mundelein v. Minx, 352 Ill. App. 3d 216 (Ill. App. 2004) (tip lacking detail about observed conduct insufficient alone for stop)
- People v. Shafer, 372 Ill. App. 3d 1044 (Ill. App. 2007) (factors for evaluating informant tip reliability)