Carpenter v. United States has opened new protections from disclosure of electronic data under the Fourth Amendment. However, Illinois courts have moved cautiously in this new frontier.
On June 12, 2024, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held the armed habitual criminal statute is constitutional under the Second Amendment and the Illinois Constitution.
The impact in Illinois of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Counterman v. Colorado, and the overall tension between protecting free speech and protecting victims of stalking and abuse.
On March 1, 2024, the Third District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that the statutes within the Illinois Criminal Code of 2012 that prohibit public firearm carriage do not violate the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
On Nov. 17, 2023, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that legislative intent cannot be ruled on without invading the province of the legislature.
On March 31, 2023, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a trial court erred for failing to suppress inculpatory statements made after a defendant invoked his right to remain silent.
What the “Ship of Theseus” metaphor tells us about the changes to the U.S. Constitution, its fortification of America’s principles, and warnings of the country’s allegedly inevitable demise.
On Dec. 16, 2021, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed an Illinois Appellate Court decision for a new trial following a trial judge’s clearing of the courtroom for a minor victim’s testimony in a sexual assault case.
On Aug. 24, 2020, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court reversed a trial court’s decision to deny a leave to substitute counsel solely on the grounds that the new attorney was not ready for trial.
On June 18, 2020, the Illinois Supreme Court held that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not protect a defendant whose conversation with a school official triggered a soft lockdown and a police response.
On April 18, 2019, the Illinois Supreme Court held that sentencing a juvenile to a prison sentence of greater than 40 years violates his or her Eighth Amendment rights because it imposes a de facto life sentence.
On Feb. 28, 2019, the trial court found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and convicted him, after bench trial, of disorderly conduct not protected by the First Amendment.
A pastor accused of sexual misconduct toward a parishioner was subjected to internal church disciplinary proceedings that exposed him to "public disgrace and scandal."
Trial counsel's failure to object to de minimis fines does not constitute a performance so inadequate as to render the representation constitutionally deficient in violation of the Sixth Amendment's right to counsel.
The Illinois Supreme Court rules that 1) a hospital blood draw does not violate the Fourth Amendment without evidence it was ordered by the police, and 2) it's not a conflict for the public defender to represent multiple codefendants.
Citing the State's unquestionable interest in the creation, regulation, and dissolution of marriage, the Illinois Supreme Court reaffirmed its 1979 Hewitt v. Hewitt holding that Illinois public policy precludes unmarried cohabitants from bringing claims against one another to enforce mutual property rights rooted in a marriage-like relationship.
The Champaign County State's Attorney explains her decision not to charge an Urbana man arrested for violating Illinois' unconstitutional but still on the books flag-desecration law.
On June 24, 2016, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court vacated a defendant's conviction and sentence for stalking and cyberstalking, finding that both crimes are unconstitutional as they lack a mens rea requirement.
Supposed the prosecution's expert testifies about a lab report conducted by a scientist the state didn't call. Is the defendant's right to confront adverse witnesses violated? Not if the report was done for reasons other than proving the defendant's guilt.
On May 9, 2016, the Appellate Court of Illinois upheld a trial court's ruling to suppress evidence obtained by a warrantless entry into defendant's home.
Does a stop's illegality taint the evidence obtained from it? A Fourth Amendment debate in the federal courts could spill over into Illinois criminal cases.
A concurring appellate justice opines that a trial judge's contempt order forcing a litigant to post a retraction on Facebook violates the First Amendment.
On August 26, 2015, the Third District Appellate Court reversed the circuit court's grant of defendants' motions to suppress evidence of heroin obtained during a traffic stop.
Recent cases from the United States and Illinois Supreme Courts hold that an officer's objectively reasonable mistake of law can justify a traffic stop.
