Case Clips» M. Bailey

One who possesses a syringe with intent to inject heroin does not commit the Legend Drug Act offense of possession of a syringe.

Illegal search of car passenger’s backpack was a “lead” which produced testimony of driver about his prior knowledge of the backpack’s contraband contents, so that the driver’s testimony was “fruit of the poisonous tree” and should have been suppressed.

The dealing in a synthetic drug and possession of a synthetic drug offenses, as in effect in 2012, are unconstitutionally vague.

Owner’s voluntary surrender of neglected animals precluded use of statute requiring payment to a shelter for care of impounded animals, but payment for animals’ care was properly ordered under the general restitution statute.

Victim’s handheld video camera video of playback of cellphone video was properly admitted under the “silent witness” theory and its admission as evidence did not violate the defendant’s confrontation rights.

After the trial court had accepted the plea agreement and entered judgment of conviction, defendant’s failure to appear for a presentence investigation did not permit the court to rescind the agreement and vacate the convictions.

Although plaintiff used bad judgment filing suit in federal court in Illinois, there was no evidence it was done in bad faith and the lawsuit could proceed based on the Journey’s Account Statute.

Savings statute for the revised penal code did not prohibit application of the revised sentence modification statute, which does not require prosecutorial consent to a modification petition, to a petition to modify a crime committed and sentenced prior to the July 1, 2014 effective date of the modification statute’s revision.

Impound of defendant’s borrowed car—and thus pre-towing inventory search—was proper despite no evidence of police department’s impound policy; car had multiple equipment problems making it unsafe and unlawful to drive away from parking lot where traffic stop occurred.

2014 amendment to sentence-modification statute did not apply retroactively; therefore, defendants’ petitions were properly denied for lack of prosecutorial consent.

Evidence was sufficient for daycare provider’s involuntary manslaughter conviction for a child in her care. Alternate juror’s misconduct in deliberations was harmless and therefore not grounds for mistrial.

The merits of Husband’s petition for contempt for Wife’s failure to pay sums incorporated in the dissolution decree should have been addressed by the trial court; the obligation was not a fixed money judgment.

Denial of motion to depose codefendants, though error, was not properly preserved for appeal; when codefendants testified at trial, defendant did not seek to exclude their testimony, renew his request to depose them, or seek a continuance.

Court could not impose maximum sentence based solely on defendant’s conduct unrelated to the circumstances of the crime; sentencing statement was therefore inadequate and required resentencing.

Amount of restitution awarded to embezzlement victim was abuse of discretion; award included sums an audit revealed were missing but were not shown to be connected to defendant’s conduct, and expenditures to determine the amount of loss.

The burden of proof on a petition to modify an existing order of grandparent visitation rights is on the petitioner to show the modification is in the best interests of the child.

Intoxicated, agitated arrestee’s statements to arresting officer were sufficient to establish “true threat” and thus to support intimidation conviction.