Pubdate: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 Source: Chicago Sun-Times (IL) Copyright: 2003 The Sun-Times Co. Contact: http://www.suntimes.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/81 Author: Abdon M. Pallasch ILLINOIS SUPREME COURT CURBS POLICE POWERS IN CAR SEARCHES A traffic stop does not give police license to conduct a full-fledged criminal investigation, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled Thursday in two different cases. The court reversed a marijuana conviction of Roy Caballes, who was stopped for driving 71 mph in a 65 mph zone on Interstate 80. While a state trooper wrote him a warning ticket, another trooper walked a drug-sniffing dog around his car. The dog reacted, and the troopers found marijuana in the trunk. Prosecutors argued that, under U.S. Supreme Court rulings, letting police dogs sniff outside the car does not violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable search and seizure because the dogs do not actually enter the car. But Justice Thomas Kilbride wrote in a 4-3 opinion, "The police impermissibly broadened the scope of a traffic stop in this case into a drug investigation." The same lineup of justices also reversed a drug possession conviction for Raymond Harris, a passenger in a car stopped in Will County. A sheriff's officer stopped the car for an illegal left turn. He requested identification from Harris because he was considering letting Harris drive the vehicle back, he said. The officer discovered an outstanding warrant for Harris' failure to appear in court and arrested him. He found a pea-size rock of cocaine. "The warrant check was not supported by a reasonable, articulate suspicion that [Harris] had committed or was about to commit a crime," Justice Charles Freeman wrote. Attorney General Lisa Madigan is considering whether to appeal the cases to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has given police more leeway to conduct searches during traffic stops, said Solicitor General Gary Feinerman. But Andrea Lyon, president of the Illinois Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and a professor at DePaul University College of Law, calls the rulings "pretty unreviewable" because federal law allows the states to grant more due process than federal case law requires, she said. "I have to say I'm pleasantly surprised because, over the last few decades, we have been giving up so much of the Fourth Amendment," Lyons said. "What the Illinois Supreme Court is doing is saying, 'We take our citizens' right to be free from unlawful searches and seizures seriously.' " Caballes' attorney Ralph Meczyk said, "The Illinois Supreme Court was not willing to chip away at Illinois citizens' basic rights." In both cases, the court ruled that "motions to suppress" evidence entered against the defendants -- namely the drugs -- should have been granted. In both cases, the same minority of three justices argued that the searches were not "unreasonable." - --- MAP posted-by: Josh