View Older Articles
Mandatory Drug Testing for Officer Involved Shootings
Did you know the Police Community Relations Improvement Act was amended effective August 25, 2017
Each law enforcement agency shall adopt a written policy regarding an officer-involved shooting
and it must now include drug testing.
Force Science News - Appeals court issues guidelines for UOF in non-criminal emergencies
Force Science News- Appeals court issues guidelines for UOF in non-criminal emergencies
Facing a medical emergency and a use-of-force dilemma, did this sheriff’s deputy do the right thing?
The deputy, working road patrol for the Oakland County (MI) SO, responded one June afternoon to a call at a residence near Detroit where four paramedics were struggling to help a man overcome a life-threatening diabetic crisis.
According to later documents in the case, a finger prick had established that his blood-sugar level was “extremely low at 38,” the normal range being 60-110. Left untreated, the “medical emergency” could “lead to prolonged seizure and death.”
January 2017 issue of The Informer
Attached please find the January 2017 issue of The Informer. This monthly publication will keep you informed of the very latest developments in case law, statute and rules changes, and provide news and articles of interest and practical import for law enforcement officers and agents.1Informer17 (pdf)In the January 2017 Informer:Case SummariesUnited States Supreme CourtUse of Force / Qualified ImmunityWhite v. Pauly: Whether a police officer violated clearly established law when he shot and killed an occupant of a home who pointed a handgun in his direction.Circuit Courts of Appeals4th Amendment (Search / Seizure / Detention / Arrest)1st Cir. (Corado-Arriaza): Whether the exclusionary rule applies to searches and seizures in civil immigration proceedings.6th Cir. (Abernathy): Whether evidence from a trash pull, by itself, established probable cause to obtain a warrant to search the defendant's house for drugs.8th Cir. (Morgan): Whether information in a search warrant affidavit was stale, whether the defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in information contained on his cell phone screen, and whether and officer violated the Fourth Amendment by taking photographs of tattoos on the defendant's arm without a warrant.8th Cir. (Wright): Whether officers had reasonable suspicion to conduct a Terry stop and then conduct a warrantless search of the defendant's vehicle.8th Cir. (Fuehrer): Whether the officer conducted a lawful traffic stop, and whether the officer unlawfully
Resource Information on the Brady/ Giglio Topic
The Northwest Illinois law Enforcement Executives Association (NWILEEA) held its winter conference in Galena, IL during the Martin Luther King Holiday weekend. The Monday morning presentation was by Attorney Jill Leka on Brady and its Progeny: What's a Police Chief to do?The training communicated that an agency needs to:-have a policy on how to deal with this mandate;-and agencies need to educate their officers on this topicBelow are some links to documents that may be helpful in designing your agencies policy and other documents you may use to manage the workflow. Here are document links for:Model policiesUrbana, IL Brady policyWashington Association of Sheriff's & Police ChiefsModel Brady Policy(also has sample letters and notification forms)Training Bulletin (San Diego County Sheriff)Public Defender Handbook on the Brady- (their view of the ruling)Below are links to MTU1 website posts and a few other links. Some agencies have had their officers read and sign off on reading these articles, as one method of training on this topic.June 2016 MTU1 website news articles -Article- Brady/Giglio Disclosures Don't Make Your Boss Have To Write A Letter from the Police Chief MagazineArticle Brady/Giglio Disclosure Requirements Law & Order MagazineArticle- Brady/Giglio Disclosure Requirements, Part 2 Law & Order MagazineArticle- Brady/Giglio Disclosure Requirements, Part 3 Law & Order MagazineArticle- Brady/Giglio Disclosure Requirements, Part 4 Law & Order Maga
Law Officer Article- Supreme Court to Consider Liability For "Provoking" Use of Force
The outcome of Supreme Court Case 16-369 (Los Angeles County, Ca v. Mendez) could pose significant challenges for law enforcement-and police training.Provoking Use of ForceBasically, the main issue involves whether law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity or liable for "provoking" the need for use of force-according to the "provocation rule" created within the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.Here's the background of the caseSynopsis: Los Angeles County, Ca v. Angel Mendez, et al.In October 2010, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department deputies conducted a warrantless search of a house looking for a wanted parolee. The deputies knocked and announced at the door of residence-and did not violate Fourth Amendment rights.Deputies were told that the man they were looking for was in a shack in the backyard.Two deputies of the team of 12 involved approached the shack and opened the door. Inside, they encountered Angel and Jennifer Mendez.Court documents state that at the precise moment the deputies entered the shack, Angel Mendez was "holding only a BB gun that he kept by his bed to shoot rats" in the shed, and that he "was in the process of moving the BB gun so he could sit up in bed."READ ARTICLE
Illinois Supreme and Appellate Court Case Summaries
Illinois Supreme and Appellate Court Case SummariesByNo. By Laurence J. Dunford (LJD), Matthew Bertani (MB), Anne Therieau Hayes and Timothy J. Joyce(TJJ)Criminal Law: Summary Suspension: Motion to Suppress: Consensual Encounters; Community Caretaker Exception: Reversed:Encounters between police and citizens that involve no coercion or detention do not implicate Fourth Amendment interests and are referred to as consensual encounters. Distinct from consensual encounters, the community caretaking Doctrine 'is analytically distinct from consensual encounters and is invoked to validate a search or seizure as reasonable under the fourth amendment.' The Doctrine applies where law enforcement officers are performing some function other than investigation of a crime, and the search and seizure must be reasonable because it is undertaken to protect the safety of the general public. Officer may ask to examine identification without reaching the level of a seizure so long as not convey compliance is required. Even if a seizure occurred when Officer took license and insurance to his squad, the Officer had reasonable articulable suspicion that Defendant was operating a vehicle under the influence of drugs. Mere fact that Officer testified that Defendant claimed he was unable to urinate to provide a sample for testing did not establish a prima facie case that he did not refuse chemical testing. There must be evidence that it was physically or psychologically impossible for him to urinate.
SB2370- Have You Made Adjustments for Custodial Interrogations of Minors?
On August 22, 2016, Governor Rauner signed SB2370 into law. Thisbill raises the age from 13 to 15 for a requirementthat children be represented by lawyers during custodial interrogations for homicide and sex offenses. Public Act 99-0882 will take effect Jan. 1, 2017.SB2370 aims to better protect children accused of crimes, and better protect their rights through legal representation. As set forth on the Illinois General Assembly website, the bill:"Amends the Juvenile Court of 1987 and the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963. Provides that a minor who was under 18 at the time of the commission of any offense must be represented by counsel throughout the entire custodial interrogation. An oral, written, or sign language statement of a minor made without counsel present throughout the entire custodial interrogation of the minor shall be inadmissible as evidence in any juvenile court proceeding or criminal proceeding against the minor. Provides that in a proceeding under the Criminal Code of 2012, a minor who was under 18 at the time of the commission of the offense must be represented by counsel throughout the entire custodial interrogation of the minor and an oral, written, or sign language statement made without counsel present shall be inadmissible in any criminal proceeding against the minor."The bill also requires videotaping all interrogations of children under age 18 for any felony and or somemisdemeanor cases and includes a uniform "Miranda warning". Below are some o
New Laws 2017: Illinois laws that take effect January 1
WLS Chicago has publisheda pretty good listing of the laws taking effect January 1, 2017CHICAGO (WLS) --With the start of the New Year always comes a new set of laws to obey. Read the complete list here, and see the top 10 new laws for 2017 above.January 1 is the effective date for almost 200 new state laws passed by the General Assembly and signed by the governor in 2016. The Senate Democrats have published their top ten list for 2017.Laws make the list based on their importance to the public and how broadly they affect key issues such as safety, ethics, workers' wages and benefits, and criminal justice reform, the Senate Democrats said.FULL LIST: Bill Number and Description (those of particular interest are in red)SB 1102 Prohibits the state or any local government from indemnifying or providing legal representation for any employee in a criminal proceeding arising out of the employee's government employmentHB 1260 Classifies online logins, biometric data and health info as protected information; updates how groups notify the public of a data breachHB 5913 Requires licensed plumbers to complete 4 hours of continuing education each yearSB 0637 Makes changes to Illinois law to comply with federal REAL ID regulationsSB 2589 Provides the Director of the Insurance Department greater authority and oversight for approving risk retention groups' corporate governance procedures and structuresHB 4517 Eliminates the Center for Comprehensive Health PlanningHB 4826 "Regional teams that
Correction To Mandated Training List Re: Narcan
It has been noted that the mandated training document's presentation style for required Narcan training was misleading. To clarify the matter please note there is a mandate for all officers to receive the training, but there currently is no mandated refresher. "Narcan" training was placed in the "every two years" section since it appeared easiest to conduct one with the CPR/AED training.The first page matrix and the Narcan related paragraph on page five of the mandated training document have been updated so it accurately defines the mandate.The suggested best practice, asstated,was misleading in regards to the mandate. The entiremandatory training document is located under the "Training" tab of the MTU1 website you will find.The Naloxone Hydrochloride (NARCAN) Information page outlining the training/program requirements is located under the "Members" tab of the MTU1 website.Here is what the Narcan related paragraph now states:NALOXONE / NARCAN Drug overdose response policy. (1) Every State and local government agency that employs a law enforcement officer or fireman as those terms are defined in the Line of Duty Compensation Act must possess opioid antagonists and must establish a policy to control the acquisition, storage, transportation, and administration of such opioid antagonists and to provide training in the administration of opioid antagonists. ***. (Source: P.A. 99-480, eff. 9-9-15.) There is no stated requirement for refresher training, but agencies may want to atta
Clock starts Soon for Mandated Training Deadline: Trauma-Informed Responses & Investigations of Sexual Assault & Sexual Abuse
Effective January 1, 2017. Trauma-informed responses and investigations of sexual assault and sexual abuse. All Law enforcement officers must receive in-service training on these topics within three years of the effective date of the act (January 1, 2017), and again every three years, thereafter. Law enforcement investigators who conduct sexual assault investigations must receive specialized in-service training on these topics within 2 two years of the act, and again every three years, thereafter. (PA 99-0801)ALSO, Section 15. Sexual assault incident policies.(a) On or before January 1, 2018, every law enforcement agency shall develop, adopt, and implement written policies regarding procedures for incidents of sexual assault or sexual abuse consistent with the guidelines developed under subsection (b) of this Section. In developing these policies, each law enforcement agency is encouraged to consult with other law enforcement agencies, sexual assault advocates, and sexual assault nurse examiners with expertise in recognizing and handling sexual assault and sexual abuse incidents. These policies must include mandatory sexual assault and sexual abuse response training as required in Section 10.19 of the Illinois Police Training Act and Sections 2605-53 and 2605-98 of the Department of State Police Law of the Civil Administrative Code of Illinois.(b) On or before July 1, 2017, the Office of the Attorney General, in consultation with the Illinois Law Enforcement Training Standard
Use of Force Training video has been released
The new Use of Force Training video produced by the Illinois Law Enforcement Training & Standards board has been released and can be found on the "LEDI" system. Since not everyone has or can have a LEDI account, a link to thevideohas been added under the members side of the MTU1 website. All officers are required to view this thirty-six minute Use of Force Training video as part of their annual qualifications All officers should still be provided the Use of Force Brochure The agency will maintain a record of those officers viewing the videoTo locate the video, go to the members tab on the MTU1 website to locate the "Annual Qualification Use of Force Training video" page. All users must have a username /password in order to access the page.
DEA Schedules Deadly Synthetic Drug U-47700
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEContact: DEA National Media Affairs(202) 307-7977@DEAHQPress ReleaseDEA Schedules Deadly Synthetic Drug U-4770046 confirmed deaths linked to dangerous opioid in '15 and '16 sparks emergency actionWASHINGTON, DC Responding to the imminent threat to public health and safety, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has placed U-47700 into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act, effective on November 14th. Emergency scheduling of dangerous drugs such as U-47700 on a temporary basis is one of the most significant tools DEA can utilize to address the problems associated with deadly new street drugs.DEA has received reports of at least 46 confirmed fatalities associated with U-47700. 31 of those fatalities occurred in New York and 10 in North Carolina. From October 2015 to September 2016, DEA has received 88 reports from State and local forensic laboratories of U-47700 submissions.This scheduling action will last for 24 months, with a possible 12-month extension if DEAneeds moredata to determine whether it should be permanently scheduled.U-47700 is a novel synthetic opioid, and its abuse parallels that of heroin, prescription opioids, and other novel opioids. Law enforcementagencies reportseizures of the drugin powder form and counterfeit tablets that mimic pharmaceutical opioids.Abuse of the drug often happens unknowingly to the user, and is encountered as a single substance as well as in combination with other drugs such as heroinandfentanyls. Som
Appellate Case Decisions 1. Civil Forfeiture & 2. Burglary-Racing Trailer in parking lot is a building
Appellate Cases Posted 10-26-16 Civil Forfeiture: DUI: Reversed: To establish "probable cause that the property may be subject to forfeiture" (720 ILCS 5/36-1.5(a) (West 2014)), the State is only required to show that there is probable cause that the property may have been "used in the commission of an offense described in Section 36-1. To pass preliminary review, the State is not required to allege or prove facts tending to disprove an affirmative defense that an owner might subsequently raise. Schwarm, J.No. 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer Filed 10-26-16 (MGB)Defendant arrested on offenses of DUI and DWLR, while operating his girlfriend's vehicle. Defendant stated he had regular use of the vehicle, which was titled in girlfriend's name because his license was revoked. Trial Court found a lack of probable cause at the preliminary hearing phase required by 36-1.5, on an affidavit which established the operation during the commission of a listed offense, but which was devoid of references to the owner of the vehicle and Defendant's statements. The circuit court erred in determining that pursuant to section 36-1.5, the State had to show probable cause that Dukes had used the Trailblazer with the girlfriend's knowledge and consent. Criminal Law: Burglary: Conviction Confirmed: 36 foot, 2 car racing trailer, parked in an open parking lot was a "building" within the meaning of the burglary statute. Cobbs, J.No. 2006 IL A
October 2016 Issue of Informer
Please find the October 2016 issue of The Informer. This monthly publication will keep you informed of the very latest developments in case law, statute and rules changes, and provide news and articles of interest and practical import for law enforcement officers and agents.10informer16(.pdf)In the October 2016 Informer:Case Summaries:Circuit Courts of Appeals:4th Amendment (Search / Seizure / Arrest) 5th Cir. (Toussaint): Whether the emergency aid exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement allows officers to conduct warrantless seizures when exigent circumstances exist. 6th Cir. (Calvetti): Whether agents were required to tell the defendant that she could refuse to consent, and whether officers were justified in extending the duration of a traffic stop. 7th Cir. (Wright): Whether officers received valid third-party consent to conduct a warrantless search of the defendant's computer for child pornography. 9th Cir. (Williams): Whether the officers' warrantless search of the defendant and his car violated the Fourth Amendment. 5th Amendment (Miranda / Due Process / Self Incrimination) 6th Cir. (Calvetti): Whether a Miranda violation invalidated the defendant's subsequent consent to search.Civil Liability / Qualified Immunity3rd Cir. (Johnson): Whether an officer was entitled to qualified immunity after he shot and killed a suspect who assaulted the officer then reached for the officer's holstered gun.FLETC Informer Webinar Series 1. The Fifth Amendment and Compelli
Appelate Court Decision: All This in One Case! -Informants, P.C. for Traffic Stops, Consent Searches, Someone Elses Car, Temporary Detention, Handcuffing, Dog Sniffs & Terry Stops O'My!
Appellate Case Posted 10-7-16Search and Seizure: Reversed and remanded:The fourth amendment requires more than some minimal level of objective justification for making a Terry stop. However, independent corroboration of significant aspects of an informant's predictions can impart a degree of reliability on the informant's other allegations sufficient to support an investigative stop. Fourth amendment guarantees are not implicated when police conduct a search pursuant to a voluntary consent. An individual who does not have a possessory interest in a vehicle cannot challenge the search of either the exterior or the interior of the car.No. 2016 IL App (1st) 152678 People v. Duran (weblink) Filed 10-7-16 (ATH)The defendant was charged with one count of possession with intent to deliver 900 grams or more of methamphetamine. The defendant filed a motion to quash arrest his arrest and suppress evidence arguing the search of the car in which he was riding as well as his bag where the methamphetamine was found was done without consent, articulable factual justification or probable cause. The trial court granted defendant's motion after a hearing finding defendant was arrested without probable cause and therefore the seizure of the methamphetamine was unlawful. The appellate court reversed the trial court's order granting the motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence.FINAL Paragraphs after going through all of the hoops!! 36 In this case, the Cadillac in which the defendant was ridi
Appelate Court Decision: Voluntary Consent Must be "Absent Any Coercion, Express or Implied"
Appellate Case Posted 10-12-16 Criminal Law: Motion to Quash and Suppress: Reversed: Voluntary consent to search is an exception to the fourth amendment's warrant requirement To be effective, however, the consent must be voluntary, meaning that it was given "absent any coercion, express or implied," and was not "the result of official coercion, intimidation, or deception." The voluntariness of the consent depends on the totality of the circumstances, and the State bears the burden of demonstrating consent was given voluntarily. Initial refusal to consent to search is an important factor in assessing whether later consent is voluntary. The fact that a written consent form was signed is not dispositive in determining whether consent to search was voluntary when circumstances show the signature was obtained through coercion. Voluntariness is a question of fact, and the trial court's finding that consent to search was voluntary will be reversed if it is against the manifest weight of the evidence. People v. Martin, 102 Ill. 2d 412, 426, 466 N.E.2d 228, 234 (1984). A police officer's giving false or misleading information can vitiate the voluntariness of the consent. Cardenas, 2 An officer making a groundless threat and presenting the occupant of the home with the choice of either consenting or suffering the consequences of the threatened course of conduct can also vitiate consent. Goldenhersh, J.No. 2016 IL App (5th) 1140596 People v. Wall(weblink) Filed 10-12-16 (MGB)After a st
View More Past Articles: