Chicago Criminal Lawyer Blog
Last week I was talking to a client about his case and the circumstances surrounding his arrest. He was explaining what the police did and was convinced that his “rights had been violated”. After he told me that “the police did not read him his rights” after he was arrested, I explained to him that a common misperception is that the police must read you your rights once you are arrested. After I explained this to the client, he asked me what rights he had when he was confronted by the police. This got me thinking about what rights citizens have when they are confronted by the police and how a lack of information about the legal rights that citizens have when the are approached by the police has led to so many criminal defendants making mistakes that should not have to be made. Let me discuss.
Let’s start off with this concept: In America, you are innocent until you are found guilty in Court. If you keep this principle in the front of your mind, then everything else I discuss in this article makes sense. I have been practicing criminal law for over 28 years. The biggest mistake that criminal defendants make is that they talk to the police. When you are approached by a police officer an are asked questions, you are presumed to be innocent. The only way to remove that presumption of innocence is if you go to Court and plead guilty, or are found guilty after a trial. Until, and unless that happens, you are innocent. Just because a police officer is asking you questions does not make you guilty of anything. You are under no obligation to prove your innocence. The state has the burden and the responsibility of proving you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You also have the absolute right to demand that the state prove you guilty without using any evidence or statements that you made to the police. That is your right as a US citizen. You have the absolute constitutional right to remain silent when the police are questioning you. Yet, most criminal defendants fail to exercise their most important and fundamental constitutional right. It’s the right to remain silent. You have the absolute constitutional right to not cooperate with the police when you are being questioned by them.
Your right to remain silent is found in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The famous case that discusses this constitutional right is commonly known as the Miranda case. Your right to remain silent kicks in as soon as you are subject to a custodial interrogation. This means that you have a right to assert your Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and not incriminate yourself if you are considered to be in custody at the time on the questioning. In custody has been determined to mean that a reasonable person looking at the facts and circumstances would determine that you were not free to leave. In the case I discussed at the very top of this post, the client was not read his Miranda rights after he was arrested. The reason that it did not matter in his case was that he did not make any statements to the police that would be considered incriminating. Not only were there no incriminating statements, but there were no statements made that the prosecutor would have any reason to admit in Court.
This is, without a doubt, one of the most common questions I get from clients, especially if the client is accused of Domestic Violence and is charged with a Domestic Battery. Most of my clients appear for their first Court date only to be disappointed when the Judge continues their case and tells them to come back with a lawyer. Because a Domestic Battery is a Class A Misdemeanor that carries up to one year in jail, the question is not if you need a lawyer, but whether you will have a Public Defender represent you or whether you will have your own lawyer represent you. This will depend on whether the Court determines that you have the ability to afford to hire your own lawyer. If the Judge determines that you do not have the money to hire a lawyer, the Judge will appoint a Public Defender to represent you.
Illinois does not allow motorists to use their cell phone for talking, texting, or using any other means of electronic communication while they are operating their motor vehicle on a public road. The only way you can use your cell phone while driving is through Bluetooth technology, provided that you are 19 and over. In the last couple of years, tickets issued for using cell phones while driving have become common. The laws regarding use of a cell phone while driving have undergone several changes throughout the years. As a result, many motorists are not fully aware of what the rules are when it comes to using their cell phones while driving. Most of the clients who I meet for cases like this frequently tell me that they did not know how restrictive the cell phone usage laws are in Illinois. I want to take this opportunity to explain the cell phone Distracted Driving law in Illinois so that you know what is allowed and what is not allowed in Illinois.
This morning I met with a client who was charged with a 
A few weeks ago, I signed up a new DUI case in Rolling Meadows. The client is only 23 years old and this was his first DUI. The client’s car broke down on the way home from a friend’s house and he had to to pull his car over by the side of the road. After a short time, a police officer approached his car and started asking him questions. The officer asked my client to perform the Standard Field Sobriety Tests on the side of the road and the client declined to do so because he is recovering from ankle surgery and was worried that he would fail the tests. The officer asked the client to blow into a Portable Breath Device to determine whether he was good to drive, and the client complied with the request. The Portable Breath Test indicated that he was slightly over the legal limit. The officer informed my client that he would be taking him to the police station to prepare some paperwork. When my client arrived at the police station, he was asked to take a Breathalyzer Test and refused. The officer told my client that he would be taken to the hospital for a blood draw to determine what his Blood Alcohol Level was. The client has a fear of needles so he refused to go to the hospital. The officer told my client that if he did not take a Blood Test that he would be placed under arrest. Fearing that he would be arrested for refusing to take a Blood Test, my client agreed to go to the hospital and agreed to have his blood drawn. Even though the police did not have the blood results, they arrested him and charged him with a DUI anyway.
Arguably, the most common question I am asked by clients. This happens all the time with Domestic Battery cases. While it’s always better to have a victim, or complaining witness, that is willing to cooperate with the defense, it does not mean that the case will be dismissed or that the Defendant is guaranteed to win their case. Let me explain.
The best evidence that the police and the prosecutors have to prove a DUI in Court is a Breathalyzer Test. While it is not necessary for the State to have a breathalyzer test to prove you guilty of a DUI in Court, it is the best evidence that the state can have in a DUI case. I frequently talk to clients who do not understand what a Breathalyzer Test is and how easy it is to get a result that could make it very difficult to fight a DUI case. I want to discuss some facts about the Breathalyzer Test and eliminate some common misunderstandings.
I frequently speak to clients who have been arrested for a DUI. After the initial shock of being arrested wears off, most DUI clients start to think about the future and the possible implications of having a DUI. As with most things, most people do not think about what could happen to them if they picked up a DUI until it actually happens to them. When I receive those calls, most clients are initially worried about whether they will be going to jail. After I explain to them that jail is usually not an option for a first time DUI, the next question is whether they will lose their license as a result of the DUI. I want to take an opportunity to talk about how a DUI can affect your drivers license.
When most people find themselves facing criminal charges, basic human instincts will kick in and they will want to try to talk themselves out of the predicament that they find themselves in. This usually happens early on in a criminal case when the police question you and want to get your side of the story. You always have the right to talk to the police and to testify at your trial, however, that may not always be the best strategy. In my 28-years of practicing criminal law, I can honestly say that the biggest mistake that most criminal defendants make is talking to the police. Sometimes, defendants continue making the same mistake and insist on testifying at trial. I want to talk about what your rights are when you are on trial and why you should think twice about talking to the police and testifying at trial.
I often have to catch myself when I’m talking to my clients about their criminal cases. As lawyers, we sometimes use terminology that while it may be common for us, is foreign to most people who are not involved in the criminal justice system every day like we are. The other day I was talking to a client about the status of their criminal case and I mentioned to the client that I was ‘waiting for Discovery’. I didn’t give the terminology a second thought, assuming that the client knew what I was talking about. However, the client made it very clear that they did not understand what I was saying and I realized that most clients probably feel the same way. I want to take this opportunity to describe what Discovery is and why it sometimes takes a long time time for Discovery to be complete.