People v. Baldwin

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Illinois » 3rd District Appellate » 2009 » People v. Baldwin

People v. Baldwin

State: Illinois

Court: 3rd District Appellate

Docket No: 3-08-0118 Rel

Case Date: 03/23/2009

Preview:No. 3--08--0118 _________________________________________________________________ Filed March 23, 2009 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2009 THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of the 9th Judicial Circuit, ) McDonough County, Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. 07--CM--419 ) ADRIAN P. BALDWIN, ) Honorable ) William D. Henderson, Defendant-Appellee. ) Judge, Presiding. _________________________________________________________________ PRESIDING JUSTICE O'BRIEN delivered the opinion of the court: _________________________________________________________________ The defendant, Adrian P. Baldwin, was charged with unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia (720 ILCS 600/3.5(a) (West 2006)). The defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence, which On appeal, the State argues that the

the circuit court granted.

circuit court erred when it granted the defendant's motion to suppress. We affirm. FACTS On July 28, 2007, McDonough County deputy sheriff Mike Pilat initiated a traffic stop of a vehicle driven by Curtis Baldwin, but owned by his wife. lane violations. Pilat had observed the vehicle make two

The defendant, who was 17 years old at the

time, was seated in the front passenger seat, and a minor female was seated in the backseat. Pilat approached the driver's side of the vehicle, and a reserve officer approached the passenger side of the vehicle. Pilat began talking to the defendant while the reserve officer shined his flashlight into the vehicle. Pilat obtained the

driver's information, then asked the passengers for identification. The passengers did not have any identification, Pilat

so Pilat asked for and received the passengers' names.

testified that the defendant mumbled his name to Pilat, resulting in Pilat having to ask more than once for the defendant's information. female's name. Pilat also had to ask more than once for the minor Pilat testified that, although he smelled a faint

odor of alcohol coming from the vehicle, he did not smell alcohol on the breath of the driver or the passengers. any odor of cannabis. Pilat also testified that the defendant began breathing heavily when Pilat asked for the defendant's name. According to He did not smell

Pilat, the defendant appeared nervous and would not look at Pilat, although Pilat admitted that the defendant might have been distracted by the reserve officer. The defendant also kept his Pilat testified that he On

right hand at his side, along the seat.

thought the defendant might be hiding something in his hand. cross-examination, Pilat stated that he also thought that the

2

defendant might have a weapon in his hand, although he did not inquire about the defendant's hands, nor did he frisk the defendant. A videotape of the stop was admitted into evidence at the suppression hearing. a stop. The tape began with the vehicle already at

Within two minutes of the beginning of the tape, Pilat

had obtained the driver's and passengers' information and returned to his squad car, at which point Pilat turned off his microphone. Approximately 2

Download People v. Baldwin.pdf