People v. Neal
954 N.E.2d 358
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Neal was convicted at a bench trial of possession of a controlled substance (heroin) and received two years' probation.
- He was arrested for violating Chicago Municipal Code § 10-8-515 by allegedly soliciting unlawful business; seven packets of heroin were found at station after custodial search.
- The arrest was based on Officer Malkowski's testimony that Neal repeatedly yelled 'blows,' which officer associated with heroin from his experience.
- The defense moved to quash, arguing lack of probable cause since shouting the word alone does not prove solicitation of unlawful business; the trial court denied.
- On appeal, the court upheld the arrest, concluding the conduct supported probable cause to arrest for soliciting unlawful business; the heroin was not suppressed.
- There is a dissent arguing the arrest relied on an expanded, improper definition of solicitation and lacked probable cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was probable cause to arrest for solicitation of unlawful business. | People argues probable cause existed to arrest for solicitation based on 'blows' slang. | Neal argues no probable cause; shouting 'blows' alone does not prove solicitation. | Probable cause existed; arrest sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Chicago v. Powell, 315 Ill.App.3d 1136 (2000) (definition of solicitation in ordinance; pari materia with criminal code; personal petition and importunity)
- People v. Hopkins, 235 Ill.2d 453 (2009) (probable cause standard for warrantless arrests)
- People v. Jones, 215 Ill.2d 261 (2005) (probable cause assessed with training and experience; totality of circumstances)
- People v. Moody, 94 Ill.2d 1 (1983) (probable cause standard; focus on what police knew)
- People v. McDonough, 239 Ill.2d 260 (2010) (mixed questions of law and fact in suppression rulings; de novo ultimate question)