CALL FOR A FREE CONSULTATION
47 DuPage Court, Elgin, IL 60120
Recent Blog Posts
Driving Too Fast Can Mean More than a Ticket
Consider a very plausible situation: you are driving back from a long road trip and you are very anxious to get home. Traffic has been rather congested for much of the trip, so your car’s cruise control has not been of much use. Finally, the road opens up in front of you and you accelerate without paying too much attention to the speedometer. Without warning, the flashing strobes of a police cruiser are behind you indicating that you need to pull over. The officer approaches your window and informs you that were traveling at 85 mph in a 55 mph zone. Just that quickly, your life could change, as such a violation may result in criminal prosecution for aggravated speeding.
Very few drivers consider speeding to be that big of a deal. Of course, you probably realize that a speeding ticket can lead to fines, points on your driver’s license, and possibly an increase in your insurance premiums. Beyond that, though, it can certainly feel like more of a nuisance than anything else.
What is Theft by Deception?
There are many ways to obtain money or property to which you are not entitled. Many of these, under Illinois, are considered crimes of theft. You may be familiar with some of the common types of theft, including shoplifting and stealing, but there is another category of such offenses that more closely resembles what many would consider fraud. This type of theft is known as theft by deception, and such charges can carry serious criminal penalties and consequences.
As opposed to simply stealing money or property, as in retail theft, or forcibly taking it from another, as in a robbery, theft by deception is generally accomplished by misleading the victim in some way. Most commonly, the victim willingly gives money or property to the perpetrator under the belief that the payment is required or will result in a beneficial business arrangement.
New Law Would Reduce Juveniles Tried as Adults
The Illinois state legislature has sent a bill to Governor Bruce Rauner that would give juvenile court judges more control over the transfer of juvenile defendants to the regular court system. If the governor approves the new law, it is expected to reduce the number of juveniles tried as adults by half or more, according to estimates. By doing so, proponents hope, rehabilitative and intervention programs available to juveniles can increasingly break the cycle of crime, keeping more young people entering into a lifetime of criminal trouble.
As the setting for the nation’s first juvenile court in 1899, Illinois—specifically Cook County—has remained at the forefront in the fight against juvenile crime. Over time, however, stricter laws have led to increased prosecution and penalties against younger and younger defendants. Currently, children as young as 13 years old may be tried as adults in Illinois, depending on the nature of their alleged crimes. Despite the developmental differences between children and adults, the prosecution of juveniles as adults is often automatic. A child defendant may never even appear in juvenile court before being pushed into the adult system.
The Burden Of Proof
In civil cases, plaintiffs are required to establish their cases by a "preponderance of the evidence," or something slightly greater than 50-50. Picture the scales of justice tipping ever so slightly in one direction or the other. But in a criminal case, the burden of proof is much higher. A defendant's guilt must be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt." In other words, even though there may be some evidence of a defendant’s guilt, that evidence is often insufficient for a jury to return a guilty verdict in many cases.
What it Means
There is no precise definition for "reasonable doubt." In fact, in The Land of Lincoln, it is illegal for the court to define the term for jurors. This concept, however, became a bit controversial in a recent case heard by an Illinois appellate court. During the original trial, the presiding judge said ,"It is for the jury to collectively determine what reasonable doubt is." Such an utterance seems innocuous, and perhaps even nonsensical. But, it may, and in this case did lead an appellate court to overturn the verdict, because such a phrase causes jurors to think they must define the term objectively.
Released on Your Own Recognizance
When you have been arrested and charged with a crime, regardless of the severity of the charge, you have the right to a fair trial. The criminal justice system in many jurisdictions, however, is often backlogged and your trial may be scheduled several months in the future. Depending on the nature of the alleged offense, as well as your history and reputation, the court has several options to ensure that you are present for your trial when required. In cases involving traffic offenses and minor misdemeanor charges, the court may elect to release you on your own recognizance.
What Does Own Recognizance Mean?
Being released on your own recognizance is, in short, the best-case scenario if you have been charged with a crime. First and foremost, it means you are not required to remain in custody until your trial. It also means that you are not required to offer any form of financial security, such as bail, to guarantee your appearance in court. Instead, you promise in writing to appear whenever required and you are free to go about your life. Depending on the case, you may be subject to certain stipulations and failure to comply could result in your arrest.
Understanding Statutory Summary Suspensions and Revocations
If you have been stopped on suspicion of DUI in Illinois, you may be asked to submit to blood alcohol content (BAC) testing. Refusing to comply with test is legally your right, but your driver&s license will be automatically suspended for one year, and for three years if you have refused chemical testing in the past. Similarly, if the test results show a BAC level of 0.08 or higher, a 6-12 month suspension of your driving privileges will be imposed for a first offense.
Once your license has been suspended by means of a statutory summary suspension, the resulting limitations will be lifted upon the conclusion of the stated time period. You will also be required to pay a reinstatement fee of $250. The reinstatement fee for a subsequent suspension increases to $500, which must be paid before the suspension will be terminated.
Criminal Trespass vs. Civil Trespass
It is against the law to remain on another person’s property once you have been given notice that you are not welcome to stay there. However, the way in which the law may be enforced depends upon the nature of the situation. Although technically a violation of the law, in some cases, trespassing is not handled as a criminal matter, and is instead must be dealt with as a civil case.
Criminal Trespassing
Under Illinois, criminal trespassing is a generally prosecuted as a Class B misdemeanor, with penalties ranging up to six months in prison and $500 in fines. Criminal trespass to a residence of another may be considered a Class 4 felony. By definition, criminal trespass is committed when a person:
- Enters or remains in or on a building or home unlawfully;
DUI Evaluation Mandatory before Sentencing
When you have been convicted of driving under the influence, restoring your life and driving privileges can be a challenging process. As with many legal proceedings, the specifics of your case have a direct impact on the difficulties you will need to overcome. In fact, the state of Illinois has built into its laws a mechanism for taking such circumstances into account: prior to final sentencing, an individual convicted of DUI must submit to an evaluation to determine his or her level of addiction and likelihood of becoming a repeat offender.
As required by Illinois law, final sentencing in a DUI case will not take place until the convicted driver undergoes an approved alcohol and drug evaluation. In addition to a face-to-face interview with a qualified evaluator, the process also requires the review of the defendant’s driving history, results of any blood-alcohol content (BAC) chemical tests, and other relevant documentation. The interview will attempt to establish if a pattern of dependency or substance abuse is apparent, and the defendant’s responses will be compared against the provided documents.
Marijuana Decriminalization Bill Passes Senate
The future of the debate over marijuana decriminalization in Illinois will soon be in the hands of Governor Bruce Rauner after a bill cleared the state Senate earlier this month. The proposed law would decriminalize low-level possession of marijuana in the state, making such possession punishable as a civil offense, similar to a traffic ticket. Possession of larger amounts, as well as the illegal production and trafficking of marijuana would remain prosecutable in the criminal system, but the law is seen by many as a reasonable approach to a contentious topic.
"Serious criminal penalties should be reserved for individuals who commit serious crimes," said Representative Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, who introduced the in the state House earlier this year. "Criminalizing people for marijuana possession is not a good use of our state’s limited law enforcement resources." The bill was passed by the House in April, and was recently approved in the Senate by a vote of 37-19.
DUI and Implied Consent in Illinois
As a licensed driver in Illinois, you have been granted certain privileges related to the operation of a motor vehicle on roadways within in the state. In exchange for such privileges, you are expected to assume certain responsibilities under law regarding safe and proper driving practices. The state of Illinois also maintains "implied consent" laws to which, by operating a vehicle in accordance with the terms of their licenses, all drivers are subject. One of the more common applications of implied consent relates to blood-alcohol content (BAC) tests when a driver is suspected of driving under the influence (DUI).
Like the implied consent laws in most states, the statutes in Illinois require you to submit to a breath, urine, or blood test if you have been arrested on suspicion of DUI. With probable cause for such an arrest, the law enforcement officer must arrange that the test be conducted as soon as possible for the sake of accuracy. There is no right granted for you to contact an attorney prior to the test and the officer selects the type of test most appropriate for the situation.
Contact Our Firm
The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.
I have read and understand the Disclaimer and Privacy Policy.
