THE CRIME OF GROOMING IN ILLINOIS

Posted on July 27, 2018 by admin

In the internet era, stranger danger is not limited to the streets.

The act of using an electronic transmission device such as the internet to induce the trust of a child under age 17 for sexual purposes is known as “grooming.” Grooming is a Class 4 felony, punishable by 1 to 4 years in prison.

Under Illinois law, a person commits grooming when he or she knowingly attempts to use or uses an on-line, internet or local bulletin board service or any other device with electronic data storage or transmission to solicit, lure or entice a child or their guardian into committing any unlawful sexual conduct.

According to People v Vara, “In the context of sex abuse of a child, grooming is commonly understood as a method of building trust with a child or an adult around the child in an effort to gain access to the child, make the child a cooperative participant in the abuse, and reduce the chance that the abuse is detected or disclosed.”

If you are charged with grooming or a similar offense, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review the options for your best possible defense. As with most other crimes, the state must prove you guilty of all the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Can the state prove that you sent the electronic messages? Did the police have probable cause to search you or your computer? Even if the evidence against you is overwhelming and the police acted lawfully, an attorney who is respected at 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.

See: Illinois Grooming Statute.

(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 grooming, sex crime, sex offender, sex offense | Leave a comment

THE CRIME OF COUNTERFEIT TRADEMARKS IN ILLINOIS

Posted on July 20, 2018 by admin

Let’s say you want to sell 100 pairs of blue jeans. Your jeans are from a no-name brand, but if they had a fancy designer label, you know you’d make a lot more money. So you copy a high-end designer’s trademark and print it on your pants. Now you may be in the money, but you’re also in trouble with the law.

The Illinois Counterfeit Trademark Act makes it a Class A Misdemeanor to use, sell or circulate items with a counterfeit trademark or service mark. Even if you haven’t sold the items, you can be charged if you intended to sell and the items are in your possession. The Act also applies to services sold using a counterfeit mark.

Your charges may be upgraded to a felony if you sold more than 100 counterfeit items, had a prior conviction within five years or caused bodily harm as a result of your offense. Besides time in prison, the court may fine you a percentage of the retail value of the counterfeit items.

To convict you, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you (1) knowingly kept or had in your possession (2) with the intent to sell or dispose of (3) any goods or merchandise to which a counterfeit mark was attached, and (4) that you were not the rightful owner of such trademark. A counterfeit mark is one that is likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive.

For example, in People v Gueye, the defendant intended to sell handbags with fake Michael Kors, Burberry and Tory Burch trademarks. The State had to show that the marks were affixed to the handbags, and that they were identical to or substantially indistinguishable from the real ones. The court found that the false labels were in fact likely to cause confusion between defendant’s bags and the real thing, and thus upheld defendant’s conviction.

If you have been charged with a criminal offense, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. The Trademark Counterfeit Act has a lot of moving parts. 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 counterfeit, counterfeit trademark | Leave a comment

ILLINOIS STATE SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN LAW BARRING GUNS WITHIN 1000 FEET OF A PUBLIC PARK OR SCHOOL

Posted on July 10, 2018 by admin

Illinois residents cannot be barred from carrying a firearm within 1000 feet of a public park or school, although it is still illegal to carry a gun within a public park.

In People v Chairez, the court held that while the rest of the Illinois Unlawful Use of Weapons law remains constitutional, the section barring weapons within 1000 feet of a park did not pass muster. The court said the ends of protecting the public did not justify the means of banning the guns. Instead, the statue could punish potentially innocent conduct if a defendant unknowingly crossed into a prohibited zone near a park. Most troublesome was the lack of notice as to where the 1000-foot limit began or ended.

Following the above decision, the Appellate Court in People v. Green, struck down sections of the gun law barring possession of a firearm within 1000 feet of a school. In Green, a security guard with a valid FOID card was convicted of unlawful use of a weapon because he was standing with a loaded, accessible firearm across the street from a high school. The court said the state failed to show that limiting guns within 1,000 feet of a school mitigated violence. Again, a lack of notice as to where the 1,000 feet began and ended was problematic.

It is still illegal, however, to carry a gun inside a public park. In People v. Bell, the court said that a public park may be considered a sensitive place, warranting reasonable measures to protect the public especially since large numbers of people, including children, congregate there for recreation.

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. Perhaps the police lacked probable cause to stop you or perhaps the evidence against you was improperly seized. 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.

(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 firearm possession, firearms, gun law, gun possession, unlawful use of a weapon | Leave a comment

STALKING THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA IN ILLINOIS

Posted on July 3, 2018 by admin

No matter how tempting it may be to strike out at your ex- through seemingly anonymous social media, you could be charged with stalking. In Illinois, stalking through social media can be prosecuted as “monitoring.”

A recent Illinois case illustrates how manipulating social media such as Facebook can run afoul of the law. In People v Gauger, the defendant used Facebook to harass his ex-wife. The ex-wife discovered that defendant had reactivated her old Facebook account when a friend asked if she had sent a new friend request. The ex-wife also received invitations from a third party who had never sent them. Defendant instead had set up a fictitious account using the third party’s name.

The court convicted defendant finding the evidence “overwhelmingly establishes that the defendant directly or indirectly through third parties monitored and communicated to or about Ms. Carswell through his Internet activities.” Because defendant had violated an existing order of protection, his offense was upgraded to aggravated stalking.

The defendant appealed, arguing that the part of the stalking statute dealing with communicating to or about someone had been struck down. The appellate court, however, reasoned that the anti-stalking statute also prohibited monitoring. Monitoring meant watching, keeping track of or checking another, usually for a special purpose. The court said, “Even without the Facebook messages, the evidence showed that defendant created at least one fictitious Facebook account in the name of Carswell’s friend, downloaded pictures of her and her family, and apparently even obtained mail addressed to her.” Defendant’s course of conduct therefore satisfied the definition of monitoring.

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. To prove stalking, the state must show that you knowingly engaged in a course of conduct that you knew or should have known would cause a reasonable person to fear for his or her or a third person’s safety or that you caused the victim to suffer other emotional distress. Can the state prove all these elements 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 cyberstalking, social media, stalking | Leave a comment

I’VE BEEN FALSELY ACCUSED OF ABUSE UNDER THE ILLINOIS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT. WHAT CAN I DO?

Posted on June 19, 2018 by admin

You’ve just been served with notice that your former domestic partner or spouse is seeking an order of protection against you. You believe the charges against you are false and merely designed to harass you.

What can you do?

If you are falsely accused, an attorney may be able to cast doubt on the credibility of the accuser. Are the accusations designed to harass or intimidate you? Is he or she simply being vindictive? There may be other inconsistencies in the evidence. At times, it may be useful to hire a private investigator look into the accuser’s allegations.

If you have received notice of an order of protection, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. Do not try to represent yourself. What you think is a reasonable explanation might convince the judge that you are a threat. The judge may rule against you based on what he or she perceives is a bad attitude or a failure to take responsibility. Be advised that an Order of Protection can have serious consequences as it can keep you out of many jobs, and you cannot get it removed from your record, so it is best to take the matter seriously.

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 domestic abuse, domestic violence, false accusation, Illinois Domestic Violence Act | Leave a comment

WHAT IS “ABUSE” UNDER THE ILLINOIS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT?

Posted on June 11, 2018 by admin

You’ve just been served notice that your former partner or spouse is seeking an order of protection against you. They are claiming that you abused them.

How is abuse defined, and what are your options?

Under the Illinois Domestic Violence Act, abuse is defined as “physical abuse, harassment, intimidation of a dependent, interference with personal liberty or willful deprivation but does not include reasonable direction of a minor child by a parent or person in loco parentis.”

If you have been served with notice of hearing on an order of protection, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. Do not try to represent yourself. What you think of as a legitimate explanation might convince the judge that your accuser has reason to be afraid. The judge may rule against you based on what he or she perceives is a bad attitude or a failure to take responsibility.

An experienced criminal law attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. Were you acting in self defense? Can you show that your spouse or former partner was making things up? Do they suffer from a mental illness? Be advised that an Order of Protection can have serious consequences as it can keep you out of many jobs, and you cannot get it removed from your record, so it is best to take the matter seriously.

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 abuse, domestic abuse, domestic violence, domestic violence act, order of protection | Leave a comment

CAN THE POLICE USE EVERYTHING I TOLD THEM AGAINST ME?

Posted on June 1, 2018 by admin

When the police came after you, you said some foolish things that you wish you could take back. Is there a way?

The answer may turn on when you were legally under arrest.

Generally, you are under arrest if a reasonable person in your shoes would feel they were not free to leave. If you could have walked away but didn’t, your statements may be used against you. If a reasonable person would not feel free to leave but no Miranda warnings were given, an attorney may be able to ask the court to suppress your statements.

To determine when you are under arrest, Illinois courts look at the following factors: 1) the threatening presence of several officers; 2) an officer’s display of a weapon; 3) some physical touching of your person; and 4) the use of language or tone of voice indicating that you may be compelled to comply with the officer’s request. Additionally, Illinois courts look at: 1) the time, place, length, mood, and mode of the encounter between you and police; 2) the number of police officers present; 3) any indication of formal arrest or restraint, such as the use of handcuffs or drawing of guns; 4) the officers’ intent; 5) your subjective belief or understanding; 6) whether you were told you could refuse to accompany police; 7) whether you were transported in a police car; 8) whether you were told you were free to leave; 9) whether you were told you were under arrest; and (10) the language officers used.

For example, in People v Gutierrez, the court found that the defendant’s actual arrest occurred in defendant’s home rather than at the police station. The court reasoned that six to ten armed officers arrived at defendant’s home awakening him at 5 a.m. Officers searched defendant’s bedroom. Defendant was never told he was free to leave. Finally, defendant was handcuffed in the police car, but not for the safety of the officers or investigation. Therefore, a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave. Because defendant’s arrest had been illegal, his statements could not be used unless the prosecution could otherwise show that the statements did not stem from the illegal arrest.

If you have questions about a criminal case, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can evaluate your case for its best possible defense. If officers lacked probable cause to arrest you or did not read your Miranda warnings before your arrest, an attorney may be able to petition the court to throw out the evidence against you. Even if the officers acted legally 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 arrest, confession, incriminating statements, miranda warnings, self incrimination | Leave a comment

NEW CYBERSTALKING LAW IN ILLINOIS

Posted on May 17, 2018 by admin

After a court ruled that part of the Illinois Cyberstalking law was unconstitutional, the legislature updated the law.

Under the new law, you commit cyberstalking when you knowingly, surreptitiously, and without lawful justification, place tracking software on an electronic communication device as a means of harassing another person. You must have threatened the other person or their family with immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement or restraint. This offense also applies if you simply caused a reasonable fear of such harm.

As under the prior law, it is cyberstalking if you used electronic communications:

1) Directed at a specific person, that you knew or should have known would cause a reasonable person to fear for their or a third person’s safety or suffer other emotional distress.

2)Knowingly and without lawful justification at least twice to harass another person, and you transmitted a threat directed to that person or their family of immediate or future bodily harm, sexual assault, confinement, or restraint, or you caused the other person or their family to fear such harm.

You may be charged with cyberstalking even if you had a third party make the threats for you, or you posted the threats on an internet website that was accessible to third parties for at least 24 hours.

Cyberstalking is a Class 4 felony (1 to 3 years in prison) for a first offense and a Class 3 felony for later offenses (2 to 5 years in prison).

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. As with most crimes, the state must prove you guilty of all the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Can the state prove you committed the offense knowingly? Was the tracking software already installed in the electronic communication device by the manufacturer? 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.

Source: Illinois Cyberstalking Law.

(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 cyber crime, cyber threats, cyberstalking | Leave a comment

CYBERSTALKING AND SEXTING CAN BECOME A HATE CRIME IN ILLINOIS

Posted on May 8, 2018 by admin

As of January 1, 2018, sexting or cyberstalking can take on an added dimension. The Illinois Hate Crime statute now includes intimidation, stalking, cyberstalking and transmitting obscene messages within the offense.

To be convicted of a hate crime on this basis, you must have intimidated, sexted, stalked or cyberstalked the other person because of their actual or perceived race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, gender, sexual orientation, physical or mental disability or national origin.

Generally, hate crime is a Class 4 felony for the first offense, punishable by 1 to 3 years in prison, but bumps up to a Class 2 felony, punishable by 3 to 7 years, for later offenses. Hate crime becomes a Class 3 felony (2 to 5 years) for a first offense if the crime is committed at a church, cemetery, school or public park.

Besides criminal penalties, the victim of a hate crime may sue you in civil court. Therefore, it is particularly important to be careful in handling your criminal case because the facts of the criminal case could be used against you in a civil suit.

If you have been charged with a sexting, cyberstalking or a hate crime, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for its best possible defense. As with most criminal offenses, the state has to prove you guilty of all the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Can the state prove your motivation?

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 Illinois Hate Crime statute,

(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 cyberstalking, hate crime, intimidation, sexting, transmitting obscene messages | Leave a comment

SCHOOL RESIDENCY FRAUD CAN BE CHARGED AS A FELONY

Posted on April 24, 2018 by admin

Understandably, you would like your child to get the best education in the best school district, but perhaps you can’t really afford to live there. You may be tempted to lie about your child’s real home in order to enroll them in that preferred school. But depending on the circumstances and the school district, you could end up charged with a felony.

In February, 2018, Orland School District 135 pressed felony charges against a mother who provided an allegedly fraudulent lease for a home in District 135. The home was actually a retail establishment. After questioning, the mother continued to provide allegedly fake documents, leading to her arrest for felony forgery. (See Woman Charged with Forgery after Giving School False Address).

Most school districts do not carry matters quite so far. They may simply disenroll your child and bill you several thousand dollars in tuition. However, the option of pressing criminal charges for at least a Class C Misdemeanor is always possible.

If you receive notice from your child’s school questioning their residency, contact an experienced school law attorney immediately. Many parents make the mistake of trying to handle the situation themselves, but they are often unprepared for what they are walking into. By the time, they call an attorney, the facts of the case have already been established and the attorney’s hands may be tied. Furthermore, once a school believes you are lying, it is very difficult to convince them otherwise. Your words are often twisted against you.

An attorney can review your situation to see if you have a genuine claim to residency. If so, the attorney can present evidence to the school accordingly. Even if your child is not a legal resident, an attorney may be able to negotiate an agreement that allows you to leave the school district without facing criminal charges or possibly paying tuition.

If you have questions about Illinois school residency, 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 felony forgery, forgery, fraud, school residency | Leave a comment