Cases Pending, co-chaired by Gretchen Harris Sperry (left)
and Catherine Basque Weiler, has been updated to discuss the Illinois Supreme
Court's May Term, which begins Monday,
May 14, 2018, with oral arguments scheduled for May 15-17, 2018 and May
22-23, 2018. A total of 15 cases will be heard – 10 criminal and 5
civil. The following 11 criminal cases are scheduled for argument this
term:
People v. Darien Harris, No. 121932: May 15
People v. Jerome Bingham, No. 122008: May 15
People v. Kirk Zimmerman (The Pantagraph, WGLT FM, and the
IL Press Assoc., Intervenors), No. 122261: May 15
People v. Torrence Dupree, No. 122307: May
16
People v. Shane Harvey, No. 122325: May 16
People v. Ahmet Gocmen, No. 122388: May 16
People v. Derrick Bonilla, No. 122484: May
16
People v. Jennifer Nere, No. 122566: May 17
People v. Nelson Young, No. 122598: May 17
People v. Jafaria Deforrest Newton, No. 122958: May
17
Below is a summary for one of the criminal cases, People
v. Ahmet Gocmen. Summaries for this case and others pending with the
Illinois Supreme Court can be found in our Cases Pending publication,
accessible to ALA members on the ALA's website.
People v. Ahmet Gocmen
Defendant, Ahmet Gocmen, was arrested and charged with
driving under the influence of drugs or combination of drugs (DUI drugs) under
625 ILCS 5/11-501(a)(4) (2015), and his driver's license was summarily
suspended. Defendant filed a petition to rescind the suspension, alleging
that the officer did not have probable cause for the arrest. The circuit
court granted the petition, and the appellate court affirmed in a published
split decision.
Officer Beaty responded to a scene at 11:10 a.m. regarding
an unconscious driver; paramedics were already present. Beaty observed
that defendant was in and out of consciousness, struggled to respond to verbal
commands, and was confused about his location. Paramedics told Beaty
that he had a high heart rate, pinpoint pupils, and a "fresh track mark"
on his arm. In the vehicle, Beaty found a baggie containing an
unidentified brown, granular substance, a used syringe, and a partial metal
beverage can with burn marks on its interior and a tannish residue on its
exterior that field-tested positive for an illicit drug. Defendant told
Beaty and paramedics that he was a diabetic, and Beaty testified to no training
or experience in identifying drug use.
The lower courts concluded that Beaty lacked probable
cause to arrest defendant for DUI drugs given that the syringe and track mark
could be explained by defendant's diabetes and that Beaty was not an expert in
recognizing drug intoxication.
Before the Illinois Supreme Court, the State argues for
reversal on any of three bases, including that the appellate majority erred
because: (1) interpreting the circumstances presented did not involve
applying expertise in recognizing drug intoxication; (2) the low probable cause
standard applied; and (3) laypersons as well as experts should be allowed to
opine on whether a person observed is under the influence of drugs.
Defendant agrees with the majority that a non-expert should never be found
competent to believe that a person is under the influence of drugs, whether at
a probable cause stage or when testifying at trial.
DISCLAIMER: The Appellate Lawyers Association does not provide legal services or legal advice. Discussions of legal principles and authority, including, but not limited to, constitutional provisions, statutes, legislative enactments, court rules, case law, and common-law doctrines are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice.
