Recent Blog Posts
The Defense of Entrapment in Illinois
Some criminal defendants find themselves charged with a crime as the result of police “encouragement,” which may involve an undercover officer or confidential informant interacting with the defendant in the commission of the crime. When a defendant in this situation discovers the extent of the circumstances surrounding his or her arrest, there are usually serious concerns and questions that arise almost immediately concerning the legality of the police conduct. Illinois law provides guidance on this issue.
The law in Illinois provides for the affirmative defense of entrapment, which is meant to provide protection against law enforcement’s use of aggressive or reprehensible tactics in inducing criminal conduct. According to the relevant statute, a person is not guilty of a criminal offense if his or her conduct is incited or induced by the police or their agent for the purpose of obtaining evidence against them. See 720 ILCS 5/7-12. However, this defense is not available if the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime and law enforcement’s actions merely afforded the defendant the opportunity or ability to commit the offense. Typically, the defense of entrapment is relevant in “vice” crimes, such as prostitution or drug deals, since these crimes are committed privately with willing victims who will not otherwise report the crime, which makes normal detection exceedingly difficult.
Miranda Rights: What They Mean to You
Any television program involving crime will undoubtedly include a scene in which, upon apprehension of a suspect, law enforcement will begin to recite the familiar verse, “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be held against you in a court of law…” Many viewers can likely repeat the Miranda rights from memory, but may not be aware of their legal significance.
The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides protection against due process violations for defendants charged in a criminal matter. This includes the right to protection against self-incrimination. In Miranda, the U.S. Supreme Court extended the protection against self-incrimination to include statements, including confessions obtained outside the courtroom, provided certain circumstances exist. According to the Court in Miranda, officers need to apprise a suspect of his or her rights before custodial interrogation occurs in order for any statements made by the suspect to be admissible as evidence in a future court proceeding. An officer may not interrogate a suspect until after warnings have been given and the suspect knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waives those rights, usually in a signed writing.
Changes in Illinois Law Meant to Curb False Confessions
Stories of wrongful convictions seem to be more popular as we make advancements in technology that was previously unavailable. Oftentimes, DNA or other forensic evidence serves to exonerate a defendant that was previously convicted of a crime, despite the fact that enough evidence was presented to support a guilty verdict. Even more surprising, the individual may have confessed to the act during police interrogation even though they were actually innocent. The Juvenile Justice Information Exchange recently ran a series of articles regarding false confessions and filmed interrogations. The latest addition focuses on Illinois’ new interrogation law, and its intended effect on reducing wrongful convictions.
The article discusses the case of Juan Rivera, who was wrongfully convicted of a rape and murder he did not commit due to coercive interrogation methods. He was charged with the crimes, even though he had been under electronic monitoring which showed he was at his home more than two miles away when the crime occurred, and there was no physical evidence connecting him to the scene. However, Rivera ended up signing a confession that police prepared and placed in front of him after four days of intense questioning that broke him down to the point of being in tears and speaking incoherently. Because of that confession, he spent 19 years in prison before he was finally freed in January 2012. Many people blame this, and other similar cases, on corrupt police tactics under the supervision of Chicago Police Cmdr. Jon Burge. Rivera’s interrogation was not recorded, despite the availability of the equipment. This meant it came down to Rivera’s word against the word of the police. The new law, which requires police to record interrogations in the investigation of certain violent crimes, is meant to safeguard against such police tactics and avoid tragic outcomes like Juan Rivera’s.
Peoria Court Affirms Home Invasion Sentence
A Peoria County appeals court recently affirmed the conviction of a man accused to participating in a home invasion. Defendant Jordan Tennon was convicted of home invasion and sentenced to 27 years in prison.
Tennon appealed his sentence alleging that the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him to 27 years when the minimum sentence for home invasion was 21 years
Authorities accused Tennon and others of invading the home of a drug dealer in hopes of finding money and drugs. About $2,000 and some marijuana paraphernalia was stolen during the home invasion. Authorities say that some of the home occupants were also assaulted and that one of the occupants was pistol-whipped.
Tennon was allegedly found in possession of $1,000 and a handgun holster as he ran outside of the house and attempted to flee through the home's backyard. Tennon allegedly admitted to participating in the heist and directed officers to the location of the gun.
In claiming that his sentence was excessive, Tennon pointed out that he was 19 years old at the time of the robbery and had no prior criminal history.
The Legality of Terry Stops Involving Informants in Illinois
Illinois residents are protected against illegal searches and seizures under the state and federal constitutions. Challenging the legality of a police search is an effective way to combat many criminal charges because prosecutors cannot use evidence which has been illegally obtained.
Chicago police officers have the right to stop and question a person if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that criminal activity is afoot. These stops are often called "Terry Stops" because they were legalized in a landmark Supreme Court case called Terry v. Ohio.
In that case, the Supreme Court held that "an officer may, within the parameters of the fourth amendment, conduct a brief, investigatory stop of a citizen when the officer has a reasonable, articulable suspicion of criminal activity, and such suspicion amounts to more than a mere 'hunch.' "
The legality of a Terry stop depends on the totality of the circumstances. Courts look at many factors in determining whether an officer had a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
City to send Police Patrols Overnight in Chicago Parks
Officials in the city of Chicago are aware of the prevalence of violent crime in Chicago parks. Four days after the FBI claimed that Chicago was the murder capital of the United States, more violence broke out in the city. An outburst of shooting occurred on September 20th at Cornell Square Park on the south side of Chicago. Waves of gunfire left 13 people wounded including a couple of teenagers and three year old boy. The shooting was considered to be gang-related as some of the victims were known gang-members.
In response to theseviolent crimes, the police department of Chicago started paying overtime to officers in high crime neighborhoods of the city for an initiative called “Operation Impact”. Overtime pay for 2013 is estimated to be around $100 million.
Use of Polygraph Tests in Chicago Crime Cases
When arrested for a crime in Chicago, the normal procedure is to be questioned by an officer. Occasionally, a member of a department’s polygraph unit would examine the suspect with the help of a lie detector test. Yet, a couple of convictions have been overturned lately, such as the murder charge against Nicole Harris. Harris was convicted of murdering her four year old son in 2005 after being coerced into a confession with a false polygraph test. In June of 2013, this conviction was overturned by a federal appeals court based on evidence uncovered by the Cook County state’s attorney’s office.
The use of polygraph examinations has decreased significantly over the past couple of years. In 2011, around 400 tests were administered to suspects of crime compared to only 50 over eight months in 2013. The reason that the Chicago Police Department gave for the drop was that polygraph units have been reassigned from forensics units to the human resources department. Their new orders include interviewing potential officer candidates. “The temporary detail was made to address the backlog in pre-employment screening needs. There hasn’t been a move away from polygraphs as a part of criminal investigations,” according to police spokesperson Adam Collins.
Rupert Murdoch reaches divorce settlement
Media tycoon Rupert Murdoch recently reached a divorce deal with his wife Wendi Deng Murdoch.
The Associated Press reports that the couple shook hands and hugged outside of the courthouse.
"We are pleased to announce that we have reached an amicable settlement of all matters relating to our divorce," the couple said in a prepared statement. "We move forward with mutual respect and a shared interest in the health and happiness of our two daughters."
Rupert Murdoch is an 82-year-old business tycoon who is originally from Australia. He's currently the CEO of News Corp and 21st Century Fox. His net worth is around 13 billion dollars.
Chinese-born Wendi Deng is Rupert Murdoch's third wife. She married Murdoch in 1999, about three weeks after he divorced his second wife. The couple has two children together.
The split will not likely have a large impact on Murdoch's business dealings. The Associated Press reports that Rupert Murdoch controls his companies through a family trust that benefits his children from his previous marriages.
Date Rape is Still Rape
Many people believe that date rape is not as serious as other kinds of rape. However, the only reason for the differentiation between the two terms is to specify the status of the involved parties. For example, the term “rape” generally happens between two strangers, while “date rape” or “acquaintance rape” happens between two people who previously knew each other on some level. Date rape can happen on a date, between two friends, between two people in a relationship, or between members of a former couple. Furthermore, because date rape regularly occurs after a date or a party, the term often indicates that alcohol or drugs played a role in the conduct.
Some offenders believe that accusations of date rape are not as serious as other types of rape charges, and that they will face less severe consequences if they force sex with someone they already know. This belief is mistaken, as Illinois law does not differentiate between types of rape. Prosecutors charge any rape act, regardless of the status of the parties, under 720 ILCS 5/11-1.20 for criminal sexual assault or 720 ILCS 5/11-1.30 for aggravated criminal sexual assault.
The Theory of Constructive Possession in Criminal Matters
There are multiple criminal offenses in Illinois that include the concept of possession as a basis of criminal liability. Perhaps criminal offenses involving contraband, such as weapons or illegal narcotics, are those crimes involving possession with which we are most familiar. The law extends the definition of possession to include both actual possession as well as constructive possession.
The Possession Rules in Illinois
In order to impose criminal liability on the basis of constructive possession in Illinois, the facts of the case must support the finding that the defendant knew of the existence of the contraband, and also was in a position to exercise control over it despite the fact that the defendant may not have had physical control of the contraband. In other words, the theory of constructive possession involves demonstrating that the defendant has both the intent and the capability to maintain control and dominion over the illegal item. Cases involving constructive possession typically include owners or tenants of a home, car, or apartment where contraband is found. This definition has been interpreted and applied in different ways by courts in Illinois.
Schedule Your Free Consultation
Arlington Heights Office 3030 Salt Creek Lane, Suite 120 Arlington Heights, IL 60005 Phone: 847-253-3100
At Cosley Law Office, we represent clients throughout Illinois, including Arlington Heights, Barrington, Buffalo Grove, Des Plaines, Elk Grove Village, Glenview, Hoffman Estates, Inverness, Long Grove, Mount Prospect, Mundelein, Northbrook, Palatine, Prospect Heights, Rolling Meadows, Schaumburg, Schiller Park, Wheeling, and Wood Dale, as well as Cook County, Lake County, DuPage County, and throughout the Chicago, IL metropolitan area.
Results listed are not a guarantee or indication of future case results.
© 2026 Cosley Law Office
3030 Salt Creek Lane, Suite 120, Arlington Heights, IL 60005
847-253-3100