Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

IL: Telling defendant he was free to go but his car was staying on I-80 for a dog stiff was a seizure of the person without RS

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

Defendant was seized when the officer who stopped him on I-80 said he was free to go but the car was staying for a dog sniff. The officer lacked RS at the time. People v. Angelia, 2009 Ill. App. LEXIS 319 (May 29, 2009): While the four Mendenhall factors are absent from this case, we believe [Off.] Thulen engaged in coercive conduct similar to the conduct contained in the Mendenhall factors. Initially, we note that Thulen's numerous statements to the defendant and the other travelers that they were free to go are not dispositive. People v. Goeking, 335 Ill. App. 3d 321, 780 N.E.2d 829, 269 Ill. Dec. 357 (2002). In fact, Thulen's actions suggested otherwise. After convincing Cagle to wait in the squad car, Thulen ordered the defendant to put her shoes on and exit her vehicle...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on June 18, 2009 (boomark / email).