THE CRIME OF UNAUTHORIZED VIDEO RECORDING IN ILLINOIS

Posted on September 20, 2019 by admin

In these days of ready access to webcams, cell phones and live video streaming, Illinois law has laid down some limits. Ignoring those limits can cost you criminal charges.

Under 720 ILCS 5/26-4, you may be charged with a misdemeanor or felony if you knowingly make a video or transmit live video of another person without that person’s consent in any of the following places:

(a) In a restroom, tanning bed, tanning salon, locker room, changing room, or hotel bedroom. (It is also illegal to place or cause to be placed a video recording or transmitting device in any of those places. Note that the definition of restroom is not limited to public facilities but includes restrooms in a person’s home).

(b) In another person’s residence without that person’s consent. (The definition of residence includes a rental dwelling but does not include areas to which the general public has access such as halls or stairways. Again, placing a video device in such an area is illegal. In People v. Maillet, the court held that the law applied where defendant recorded another resident in defendant’s own home).

(c) Outside the other person’s residence through use of an audio or video device that records or transmits from a remote location.

(d) Under or through clothing worn by the other person in order to view their body or undergarments.

You may also be charged if you knowingly disseminated or allowed such a video to be disseminated if you knew the video was made in violation of the law.

The law does exempt law enforcement officers, correctional officers and news reporters in certain situations such as where an officer pursues a criminal investigation or a news reporter covers a sports event from the locker room.

If you have been charged with a unauthorized video recording or other offense, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. Do the police have probable cause to arrest you? Can the state prove all the elements of your offense beyond a reasonable doubt? Even if the police acted lawfully and the evidence against you is overwhelming, an attorney who is respected in the courthouse may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in video offense, video recording, video streaming | Leave a comment

WHAT ARE YOUR CHILD’S RIGHTS WHEN QUESTIONED BY POLICE?

Posted on September 10, 2019 by admin

After getting in trouble at school, your minor child was questioned by police. You were not present, and your child was scared and started talking.

What are your child’s rights?

Under 705 ILCS 405/5-401.5, your child’s statement is presumed inadmissible as evidence if an officer or other public official takes your child’s statement during a custodial interrogation without first reading your child his or Miranda rights. The officer must then ask: (A) “Do you want to have a lawyer?” and (B) “Do you want to talk to me?”

Further, any statement your minor child makes as a result of custodial interrogation conducted at a police station or other place of detention is presumed inadmissible as evidence unless the custodial interrogation is electronically recorded, and the recording is substantially accurate and not intentionally altered. Recording is only required for certain offenses such as felonies and misdemeanor sex offenses. An unrecorded statement may still be admitted under certain circumstances, such as when 1) electronic recording was not feasible, 2) your child spontaneously says something that wasn’t responding to a question, or 3) your child asks to talk without being recorded.

A statement made without the above safeguards may become admissible if the state can show by a preponderance of the evidence that the statement was voluntarily given and is reliable based on the totality of the circumstances.

Whether the above safeguards apply may depend on if your child is considered to be “in custody.” The above law defines “in custody” as “any interrogation (i) during which a reasonable person in the subject’s position would consider himself or herself to be in custody and (ii) during which a question is asked that is reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response.”

If your child has been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your child’s case for its best possible defense. Was your child in custody? Did the police follow proper procedures? Can the state prove all the elements of your child’s offense beyond a reasonable doubt? Even if your child’s confession is admissible, an attorney can help protect his or her rights going forward and may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your child’s behalf.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

See also In re Jose A.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in interrogation, juvenile, juvenile delinquency, police questioning | Leave a comment

WHEN AM I CONSIDERED UNFIT TO STAND TRIAL IN ILLINOIS?

Posted on August 28, 2019 by admin

You must be fit to stand trial before you can be prosecuted. You must also be fit before sentencing or entering a plea agreement. Under Illinois law, you are not considered fit if you cannot assist in your defense or understand the nature and purposes of the proceedings against you because of your mental or physical condition.

If your fitness is in question, your attorney must raise the issue before a plea is entered or before, during or after trial. In other words, you cannot claim you are unfit after you have entered a plea agreement or been sentenced.

If there is bona fide doubt as to your fitness, the court must order a determination of that issue before moving forward with a plea agreement trial or sentencing.

Before trial and at your request, a qualified expert may be appointed to examine you in order to determine whether a bona fide doubt as to your fitness to stand trial may be raised. If there is such a doubt, then the court may order an appropriate examination. However, the order for an examination will not prevent further proceedings in the case from taking place.

When a bonafide doubt as to your fitness has been raised, the state must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that you actually are fit or else the case cannot move forward. The court may also call its own witnesses and conduct its own inquiry.

If you are deemed unfit, the court may rule on any motions where your presence is not essential to fairly determine the issues.

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. If there are questions about your fitness, an attorney can help present them to the judge.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

See 725 ILCS 5/104-11 and People v. Westfall.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in fitness for trial | Leave a comment

CAN I BE CONVICTED OF DISORDERLY CONDUCT FOR ASKING A QUESTION?

Posted on August 17, 2019 by admin

(Updated 1/4/24: See our related posts at What is the Difference Between Felony and Misdemeanor Disorderly Conduct? and Disorderly Conduct: Calling in a False Alarm).

You were just curious, so you called a government office and started asking questions. You wanted to know how they handle threats involving guns or bombs. Something in the nature of your questions spooked the office manager, and now you have been charged with disorderly conduct.

Were your questions enough to get you convicted? What about freedom of speech? What can you do now?

In Illinois, depending on what you said and how you said it, you could be convicted of disorderly conduct. (See 720 ILCS 5/26-1(a)(1)). To do so, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you “knowingly” committed an act in an unreasonable manner that you knew or should have known would tend to alarm or disturb another so as to cause a breach of the peace. The court looks at the unreasonableness of your conduct and its tendency to disturb. You need not have made overt threats or used abusive language.

In People v. Swenson, the defendant asked a school what would happen if he showed up on campus with a gun, whether the school had bulletproof windows, and how long it would take for police to arrive. Amidst other bizarre comments, the defendant asked the school principal if she was prepared to have the “sacrificial blood of lambs” on her hands. The court held that under the circumstances, defendant clearly exceeded the bounds of reasonableness and that he should have known his conduct would be disturbing. The court also held that the First Amendment did not protect the manner in which defendant expressed himself.

If you have been charged with disorderly conduct or a similar crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. Can the state prove all the elements of your offense beyond a reasonable doubt? A determination of disorderly conduct is very fact specific. An experienced attorney, who knows the courthouse, may be able to present your facts to a judge in their most favorable light.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in disorderly conduct | 2 Comments

WILL MY OUTSTANDING COURT FINES KEEP ME FROM EXPUNGING OR SEALING MY CRIMINAL RECORD IN ILLINOIS?

Posted on August 9, 2019 by admin

The answer, in most cases, is no.

A change in Illinois law permits you to expunge or seal your criminal record notwithstanding any fines or fees you may owe.

Before you can clear your criminal record, your case must have been terminated. As of August 10, 2018, the definition of termination does not include any outstanding financial obligations. Therefore, the court cannot deny your petition because you owe a court or government imposed debt. Once your record is sealed, the court may still permit access to any records necessary to collect the debt from you.

The court may still deny your petition if you haven’t paid legal restitution to a victim unless that restitution has been converted to a civil judgment.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com. Reference: Public Act 100-0776

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in clear criminal record, criminal record, expungement | Leave a comment

ILLINOIS COURT FINDS ARREST BASED ON CHICAGO POLICE INVESTIGATIVE ALERT UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Posted on August 2, 2019 by admin

(UPDATE: On April 15, 2021, the Illinois Supreme Court in People v. Bass vacated the Appellate court’s decision below regarding investigative alerts. In doing so, the Supreme Court still found that the stop violated the Fourth Amendment because it was unduly prolonged.)

Chicago police regulations allow officers to arrest people on the basis of an investigative alert where there is probable cause to believe a suspect has committed a crime. But a recent Illinois court has now ruled this practice unconstitutional.

In People v. Bass, the defendant allegedly molested a minor. Chicago police issued an investigative alert but did not apply for an arrest warrant. Three weeks later, police pulled defendant over, ran a name check then arrested him based on the alert.

The court held the arrest illegal because an investigative alert allows a police supervisor—rather than a judge–to determine probable cause. The court reasoned that the Illinois constitution goes “a step beyond” the U.S. Constitution in requiring a warrant in these circumstances before a valid arrest can be made.

Although the arrest was illegal, the court sent the case back for a new trial because there was sufficient other evidence to convict defendant.

The court noted that only the Chicago Police Department appears to use investigative alerts (also called “stop orders”). By striking the practice, Chicago Police would be put on an equal footing with other police departments, the court said.

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. Did the police follow proper procedure to arrest you? Even if the police acted lawfully and the evidence against you is overwhelming, an attorney who is respected in the courthouse may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in illegal arrest, investigative alerts, stop orders, warrantless arrest | Leave a comment

CAN POLICE SEARCH THE HALLWAY OF YOUR APARTMENT BUILDING?

Posted on July 18, 2019 by admin

The Fourth Amendment guarantees citizens the right to be free from unlawful searches. Therefore, an officer cannot enter your home without a warrant unless some exception to the warrant requirement—such as consent—exists.

Court have also recognized that a certain area around your home, known as the curtilage, is protected from police intrusion. Your front porch would be one example but what about the hallway of an unlocked apartment building? An Illinois court says yes.

In People v Bonilla, an officer used a narcotics dog to sniff the hallway outside defendant’s apartment. The court held that the police officer’s actions constituted a search under the fourth amendment even though defendant’s apartment building was unlocked and unsecured. The court reasoned that a person who lived in an unlocked apartment building was not entitled to less protection than a person who lived in a locked apartment building. At the heart of the fourth amendment is a person’s right to retreat into his or her own home and be free from unreasonable governmental intrusion. The fourth amendment does not differentiate as to the type of home involved.

The defendant may have lacked a reasonable expectation of complete privacy in the hallway or an absolute right to exclude all others from it. But this did not mean that police could use sensitive devices or a trained drug-detection dog directly in front of his apartment door.

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. Were police searching somewhere they had no right to be? Even if the police acted legally and the evidence against you is overwhelming, an attorney who is respected in the court house may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(The Illinois Supreme Court upheld the above decision on appeal in People v. Bonilla).

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in curtilage, illegal search, search and seizure | Leave a comment

ILLINOIS ACCOMODATION FOR DEAF PRISONERS

Posted on July 12, 2019 by admin

For the deaf, imprisonment can be especially isolating and punitive. Inmates may literally have no one to talk to. As a result of a federal class action law suit, Illinois agreed to accommodate prisoners with hearing disabilities.

Among its terms, the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) will begin screen for hearing loss, create a centralized database on inmates with hearing disabilities and provide a specialist to assess an inmate’s need for services. IDOC must keep a ready supply of hearing aid batteries. IDOC must also make certain technologies available, such as amplified telephones and a teletypewriter.

IDOC audio-visual media such as televisions and movies must have open and closed captioning. Hearing impaired inmates may choose headphones that prevent them from disturbing other inmates.

IDOC must adopt visual and tactile alert notifications. Such notices may be used to inform inmates of mealtime, visitors, medical appointments, evacuations and emergencies.

Handcuffs may be removed to allow a prisoner to communicate through American Sign Language. Hearing impaired prisoners must have equal job opportunities.

The settlement may be viewed at uplc.chicagoorg

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. Can the state prove all the elements of your offense beyond a reasonable doubt? Even if the evidence against you is overwhelming, an attorney who is respected in the court house may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

CAN YOU BE CHARGED WITH UNLAWFUL USE OF A WEAPON WHEN YOU ACTED IN SELF DEFENSE?

Posted on July 1, 2019 by admin

You were visiting family when things got crazy. One drunken relative started beating their spouse so you grabbed the family gun to put a stop to it. But since you didn’t have a gun license, the police arrested you on a weapons charge.

Can they do that if you were just trying to protect yourself? Depending on the facts, a recent Illinois court said no.

You may be charged with Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon if you (1) knowingly carried or concealed on your person an uncased and loaded pistol, (2) at a time when you were not on your own land, in your own abode, or in a fixed place of business, or you were on public land, (3) that pistol was immediately accessible when you carried it, and (4) you did not have a Firearm Owner’s Identification card or concealed carry license.

On the other hand, you may be acting in self defense or defense of another if (1) unlawful force is threatened against a person, (2) the person threatened was not the aggressor, (3) the danger of harm was imminent, (4) the use of force (by the threatened person) was necessary, (5) the person threatened actually and subjectively believed a danger existed that required the use of force applied, and (6) the beliefs of the person threatened were objectively reasonable.

In People v. Crowder, 2018 IL App (1st) 161226, the court held that self defense could be a defense to a weapons charge: In that case, three men knocked down the defendant’s father and threatened to kill him. Defendant grabbed the gun from his father’s holster to protect both his father and himself. The court reversed his conviction based on necessity or self defense.

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. Even if the police acted lawfully and the evidence against you is overwhelming, an attorney who is respected in the courthouse may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in necessity defense, self defense, unlawful use of a weapon, UUW | Leave a comment

CAN I SHOW MY TATTOOS AT TRIAL WITHOUT HAVING TO TESTIFY?

Posted on June 3, 2019 by admin

Let’s say you have been arrested based on an eye witness’s identification. The witness, however, is mistaken, and you can prove it by showing that you have physical characteristics missing from the witness’s description. For a number of reasons, your lawyer does not want you to testify on your own behalf. Can you show your physical characteristics without taking the stand?

A recent Illinois court decision says that you can—provided you can lay the foundation necessary to admit the characteristic into evidence.

In People v. Gonzalez, the defendant was linked to a murder based solely on eyewitness identification. The witnesses, however, did not mention the tattoos on defendant’s hands. The defendant wanted to show his tattoos at trial. The court denied his request reasoning that the state would be unable to cross-examine defendant as to when he had obtained the tattoos.

The appellate court disagreed. Physical characteristics are not testimonial and therefore do not raise the right to cross-examine. In fact, the state can force a defendant to show tattoos without violating the defendant’s right against self-incrimination. Foundation on the timing of the tattoos could instead be laid by a tattoo parlor receipt or by testimony from other witnesses who could then be cross-examined. Therefore, a defendant can show his tattoos without testifying.

If you have been charged with a crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can help present the facts of your case for your best possible defense. Can the state prove all the elements of your offense beyond a reasonable doubt? Can you present evidence in your defense without having to testify? Even if the police acted lawfully and the evidence against you is overwhelming, an attorney who is respected in the courthouse may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Posted in physical evidence, self incrimination, tattoo, testimony | Leave a comment