
When someone runs after seeing the police, officers are naturally going to become suspicious. But suspicion and probable cause are not the same thing. I have handled criminal cases for many years where the legality of a police stop, arrest, or search became one of the most important issues in the case. One of the first questions that has to be asked is not simply what the police eventually found. The more important question may be: What did the police know before they stopped, arrested, or searched the person? That distinction can make a tremendous difference. If the police see someone run and eventually discover drugs, a firearm, or other evidence, the fact that something illegal was ultimately discovered does not necessarily make everything the police did beforehand lawful. Courts generally examine the facts known to the officers when they acted. This brings up an important question: Is running from the police, by itself, enough to establish probable cause to arrest you or search you or your vehicle? Generally, the answer is no. Flight can certainly be an important factor, but it does not automatically give the police unlimited authority to arrest or search someone.
The Fourth Amendment Protects You From Unreasonable Searches and Seizures
The starting point is the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. This constitutional protection applies to police encounters ranging from temporary investigative stops to arrests and searches of vehicles, homes, and personal property. One of the most important things to understand is that there are different legal standards governing different police actions. Police may sometimes temporarily detain someone based upon reasonable suspicion. An arrest ordinarily requires the higher standard of probable cause. Those terms are sometimes used interchangeably in everyday conversation, but legally they mean different things.
Chicago Criminal Lawyer Blog










Learning that you have been indicted by a Grand Jury can be frightening, particularly if you have never been involved in the criminal justice system before. People often hear the word “indictment” and assume that it means the government has proven its case or that a conviction is likely. That is not what an indictment means. An indictment is a formal criminal charge. It means that a Grand Jury determined that there was probable cause to charge you with a crime. It does not mean that you have been found guilty, and it does not take away the prosecution’s obligation to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt if your case ultimately goes to trial.






If you are facing criminal charges in Illinois, understanding your options for resolving your case is crucial. As an experienced criminal defense attorney, I often explain to my clients the key differences between Conditional Discharge and Court Supervision, two sentencing alternatives available in Illinois. Both can help you avoid jail time, but they come with different consequences and benefits. Knowing the difference can impact your future, your criminal record, and your ability to move forward after a legal issue.