RECENT CASE SUMMARIES S.F was arrested by the Glencoe Police Department for Driving While Under the Influence of Alcohol and Drugs. S.F had used prescription back medication in conjunction with the consumption of alcohol and was pulled over for striking a curb multiple times and had damage to her vehicle that was fresh damage that she was unaware of. After a motion in limine, the arresting officer was barred from rendering an opinion as to impairment from drugs since the state could not qualify the officer as a drug recognition expert. Due to the granting of the motion, the State could not meet their burden and S.F was found not guilty of driving while under the combined influence of alcohol and drugs. K.J. was arrested for DUI by the Chicago Police Department. The arresting officer was an officer who was not experienced in the field of DUI. Her partner in crime was a Chicago police officer who had been put on desk duty for close to 6 months based upon the fabrication of events and cases. Due to an in depth approach with a careful attention to subpoenaed materials, it became clear to the judge that these two officers were inconsistent with each other in many fashions and directed the State’s case out (dismissed it) without the need for the Defense to even put on a case.
A.G was arrested by the Skokie Police Department for DUI and submitted to a breath test with a breath alcohol concentration of 0.087. The police officer maintained that A.G. had committed improper lane usage at a specific location. However, I was able show with the demonstrative aid of a map via the DVD that the location of the alleged violation was actually depicted on the DVD. As such, the officer was speechless and so was the State’s Attorney. The Judge said to the State, “What could you possibly say to this in response.” It is clear that police officers do embellish and lie. In this case, the result was the suppression of the breath test and the case was dismissed.
G.D was arrested by the Hoffman Estates Police Department for DUI. He was involved in an accident and although the police had mobile video recording devices in their vehicles, neither police officer turned their cameras on. This violated the police department’s protocol for use of cameras pertaining to DUI and field sobriety testing. Accordingly, I filed a motion for sanction requesting that the officers be precluded from testifying to anything that would have been captured on the camera and that was granted. After that motion was granted, the State virtually had no case and G.D. was found not guilty.
E.K. was arrested on 10:53 by the Kildeer Police Department for DUIand submitted to a breath test at 12:02 am (the next day). The police officer made an error while filling out the notice of summary suspension because he stated that notice was given on the day of the arrest and not the next day when the breath test was failed. Due to the police officer’s error, E.K.’s summary suspension was to begin 1 day earlier than it should have. I filed a motion to dismiss the suspension based upon a due process violation, which was granted pursuant to applicable caselaw.
|
