Scott’s Law in Illinois is the requirement that drivers slow down and move over when police cars or other emergency vehicles are stopped on the roadway.

Scott’s Law Basically Says…

Scott’s law requires that a driver proceed cautiously when an emergency vehicle is stopped and

* Move over and change lanes and/or* Slow down if changing lanes is impossible.

The law imposes enhanced penalties, a possible driver license suspension, and even jail time for severe violations.

625 ILCS 5/11-907(c)

The exact language of the section provides that:

“(c) Upon approaching a stationary authorized emergency vehicle, when the authorized emergency vehicle is giving a signal by displaying alternately flashing red, red and white, blue, or red and blue lights or amber or yellow warning lights, a person who drives an approaching vehicle shall:

(1) proceeding with due caution, yield the right-of-way by making a lane change into a lane not adjacent to that of the authorized emergency vehicle, if possible with due regard to safety and traffic conditions, if on a highway having at least 4 lanes with not less than 2 lanes proceeding in the same direction as the approaching vehicle; or

(2) if changing lanes would be impossible or unsafe, proceeding with due caution, reduce the speed of the vehicle, maintaining a safe speed for road conditions and leaving a safe distance until safely past the stationary vehicles.”

625 ILCS 5/11-907(c).

Scott’s Law Fines

Maximum fines for a violation of Scott’s Law can be up to $10,000. The chart below outlines the minimum fine that is applicable:

Minimum $250 up to $10,000For 1st offenseMinimum $750 up to $10,000For 2nd or more offense

625 ILCS 5/11-907(d).

Suspension Of Drivers License Under Scott’s Law

A violation of Scott’s Law is considered a moving violation in Illinois. That means the secretary of state will assign points against your driving record and a discretionary suspension under 625 ILCS 5/6-206 may be incurred.

However, the chart below describes certain mandatory suspensions under Scott’s Law if there are aggravated circumstances:

90 days to 1 yearIf there is property damage180 days to 2 year If there is personal injury2 year suspensionIf there is a death to a person

625 ILCS 5/11-907(e), (f), (g).

Jail Time For A Scott’s Law Violation

An ordinary violation of Scott’s Law in Illinois is considered a business offense. That means it is punishable by fine only.

However, Scott’s Law may classified as a crime and a person may face jail time under the conditions listed below:

Class A MisdemeanorIf there is damage to anther vehicleClass 4 FelonyIf there is injury or death to another person

625 ILCS 5/11-907(d)Class A Misde...

In re K.M., 2019 IL App (1st) 172322 (February). Episode 595 (Duration 13:05)

Police entered onto private property without a warrant to retrieve stolen property, the fallout is widespread.

Subscribe: Apple | Google | Spotify | Android | RSS | Direct Download

APPLE PODCASTS GOOGLE PODCASTS

SPOTIFY ANDROID RSS

DIRECT DOWNLOAD

Anonymous Call

Sauk Village Police Department received an anonymous call on, around 12:18 p.m. from an individual who reported seeing people enter the residence at 22438 Yates Avenue, with items, particularly a television.

The caller called multiple times during the investigation directing the police to 22438 Yates Avenue.

The police department opened a burglary investigation.

The Search But No Seizure

Police arrive and conduct a search of the area surrounding the residence including the garbage cans located on the driveway and the detached garage.

The garbage can was not covered with a lid.

Home Owner Finally Called

That same afternoon, Sauk Village police received another call reporting a burglary.

The caller stated that he had returned home and discovered computer accessories, personal documents, and a large flat-screen television were missing. The items taken were documents including a passport, bank statements, a black television, a black laptop, and a black external hard drive. 

Back To The Garbage Cans

According to police, the garbage was full, but they could identify documents in the garbage that belonged to the victim. The officer did not have to manipulate the garbage in any way to see the victim’s name on the documents.

Police immediately could see a garbage can with a black box on top of the garbage can. They opened the black box and found the victim’s passport and documents with the victim’s address inside the black box. 

Into The Detached Garage

People v. Day, 2019 IL App (4th) 160217 (January). Episode 588 (Duration 16:46)

He wasn’t behind the wheel but state still proved he was driving.

Subscribe: Apple | Google | Spotify | Android | RSS | Direct Download

APPLE PODCASTS GOOGLE PODCASTS

SPOTIFY ANDROID RSS

DIRECT DOWNLOAD

See also the subsequent opinion: People v. Day, 2019 IL App (4th) 160217-B  (September).

Issue

According to defendant, the State failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he drove under the combined influence of alcohol and cannabis.

The Truck

At the southeast corner of the intersection, a black 1975 Chevrolet pickup truck had come to rest.

The truck had “front[-]end damage to the middle grill, bumper region,” as if it had “struck a tree or pole or something of that nature,” and leaves were entangled in the grill. The engine was off, but the headlights were still on, and the key was in the ignition.

Nobody was in the truck or anywhere in sight.

“On the driver’s seat floorboard[,] there was a black cell phone and one orange flip-flop.”

The Camper

About three-quarters of a mile north, in the 5400 block of Kruse Road, a camper, or “topper,” was on the ground.

It had sustained extensive damage to the front. Once it became separated from the vehicle, it had more or less collapsed on itself.

The Tree

The 5400 block of Kruse Road was the “original accident scene”—there police found a tree that the truck apparently had struck—and that, after the camper became separated from the vehicle, the vehicle continued south from the accident scene.

The Defendant

About 57 minutes after police arrived at the scene, a call came in from a third party, requesting a welfare check of “a white male” who was walking south on Illinois Route 121, south of the tree’s location.

People v. Monroy-Jaimes, 2019 IL App (2d) 160426 (January). Episode 586 (Duration 9:38)

Interesting use of an informant, how much of it was legal?

Confidential Informant

Police had an individual who was in custody for having possessed drugs with the intent to deliver.

This confidential informant identified a person named “Chilango,” who was later identified as the defendant, as someone who could provide cocaine.

The First Phone Call

At an officer’s direction, the informant placed a phone call to Chilango.

The officer was able to hear both sides of the conversation. Although the conversation was in Spanish, This officer spoke fluent Spanish. The informant asked Chilango for five ounces of cocaine. Chilango stated that he could provide only two ounces right away or five ounces later.

A short time later, the informant called Chilango again and stated that he could wait to get five ounces. They also discussed meeting at a BP gas station at 149 East Ogden Avenue in Hinsdale to conduct the drug sale.

Chilango stated that he would call when he had the cocaine.

The Second Phone Call

Later, the officer directed the informant to call Chilango again.

The officer heard both sides of the conversation. Chilango told the informant that he was waiting to get the cocaine but that they could meet at the gas station in about an hour. About a half-hour later, Chilango called the informant and to say that he was on the way to the gas station.

The Gas Station

At about 7 p.m., the informant received another call from Chilango, who asked for directions to the gas station.

Chilango called again for more directions a few minutes later.

Shortly after 7 p.m., the informant and the officer were parked with a view of the gas station. The informant told the officer that he saw Chilango arriving at the gas station in a Toyota Rav 4. Police observed the defendant pull into the gas station and park at a gas pump.

The officer identified the defendant in court as the person he saw in the vehicle at the gas station. The defendant had not committed any traffic violations when he pulled into the gas station. After parking, the defendant exited his vehicle and went into the gas station.

The Third Phone Call

The informant received another call from Chilango at about 7:10 p.m.

Chilango stated that he was at the gas station. At that point, the officer with the informant alerted surveillance officers, who went into the station and placed the defendant in custody. The officer then had the informant call Chilango’s phone number, and one of the surveillance officers answered the defendant’s phone.

At the police station, the officer overheard the defendant talking and recognized the defendant’s voice as the voice of Chilango.

Issue

The defendant argues that the police did not have probable cause to arrest him.

Probable Cause

A warrantless arrest is valid only if supported by probable cause.

Probable cause to arrest exists when the facts known to the police when they make the arrest are sufficient to lead a reasonably cautious person to believe th...

People v. Hill, 2019 IL App (4th) 180041 (January). Episode 584 (Duration 16:08)

Officer sees passenger riding low in the seat and thinks it may be a guy wanted on warrant, turns out it wasn’t him.

Subscribe: Apple | Google | Spotify | Android | RSS | Direct Download

APPLE PODCASTS GOOGLE PODCASTS

SPOTIFY ANDROID RSS

DIRECT DOWNLOAD

Issue

Defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence of the cocaine found in the car, arguing the officer did not have reasonable suspicion for the stop and, alternatively, probable cause to search defendant’s car.

Trial judge grants the motion, in part, because the officer had no other corroborating evidence of identification.

Gist

Defendant was the driver of the car.

The car, however, was stopped because of a mistaken identity of the passenger.

The State charged the driver with unlawful possession of a substance containing less than 15 grams of cocaine.

Resolution

The court concluded the officer did nothing wrong. The constitution does not require perfection. The car was legally stopped even though the traffic stop was based on a mistaken identity.

After the stop, the officer was legally entitled to engage the occupants. When he did he realized the man was not who he thought he was, but he also noticed the odor of cannabis.

At that point, the search of the car was legally justified.

Passenger Riding Low

Officer sees a Chevrolet Monte Carlo quickly decelerated such that traffic began to back up.

As the car drove by the officer, he noticed the passenger was reclined in the car with his head mostly obstructed by the side panel, where the seatbelt is attached, referred to by the officer as the “B panel.”

The officer then drove from his parked location in order to get a better look at the passenger. It was his experience that people wanted on warrants or concerned about rival gang members frequently ride in the same manner he was observing ...

People v. Relwani, 2019 IL 123385 (January). Episode 582 (Duration 10:18)

You Can’t Be Suspended On Private Property: How To Prove A Private Property Recession of Suspension.

Here’s the lower court opinion.

People v. Relwani, 2018 IL App (3d) 170201 (February). Episode 471 (Duration 7:01)

Subscribe: Apple | Google | Spotify | Android | RSS | Direct Download

APPLE PODCASTS GOOGLE PODCASTS

SPOTIFY ANDROID RSS

DIRECT DOWNLOAD

In this Illinois DUI prosecution, Defendant loses his SSS hearing because he didn’t establish the Walgreen’s parking lot was privately maintained.

Gist

Defendant lost his motion to rescind statutory summary suspension because he needed to say something about the private nature of the Walgreen’s parking lot.

Illinois DUI Resource Page

Check out the Illinois DUI Resource Page

to learn more about DUI in Illinois.

Facts

Defendant was asleep in the driver’s seat of his vehicle in the parking lot of a Walgreens drug store in Joliet, Will County, Illinois. Defendant was the only person in the vehicle at the time. The keys to the vehicle were in the ignition, and the engine was running.

Police officers approached the vehicle, woke defendant, and subsequently arrested defendant for DUI.

No Fields

After defendant was arrested, he was taken to the police station, where he allegedly refused to submit to some form of chemical testing. Defendant’s driver’s license was later summarily suspended by the Secretary of State.

The Private Parking Lot Rule

Defendant contends further that the State did not present any evidence in this case to show that defendant was observed driving on a public street or ...

Episode 724 (Duration 33:57). Chicago defense attorney Peter Lewis explains what a litigant can do…

when their criminal discovery is missing the police body cam video.

Subscribe: Apple | Google | Spotify | Android | RSS | Direct Download

APPLE PODCASTS GOOGLE PODCASTS

SPOTIFY ANDROID RSS

DIRECT DOWNLOAD

Attorney Peter Lewis

Peter Lewis has been an Illinois attorney since 2004. He currently has an extensive criminal law practice. He handles cases throughout Cook County and the collar counties.

Main Areas Of Law

 In Chicago what are the three main areas of law that govern the police use of body cameras?

* United States Department of Justice & Chicago Police Department Consent Decree* Illinois Law Enforcement Officer-Worn Body Camera Act* Chicago Police Department Special Order S03-14 on Body Worn Cameras

What Does The Consent Decree Say About Body Cam?

What does the Justice Department’s Chicago Police Department Consent Decree say about the use of police body cams?

On page 6 of the report it says,

…that the Justice Department supports the City’s decision to accelerate its plan to ensure that all CPD officers have body cameras.

In the “Recommendations” section of the report, it says that CPD should “adopt use of force practices that minimize the use of fore.” Subsection (i) states,

Equip all patrol officers and supervisors, and officers who regularly interact with the public, including tactical officers, with body cameras, and develop a body camera policy delineating officers’ responsibilities regarding the consistent and appropriate use of body cameras and ...

Kane County Sheriff Ron Hain has instituted a series of new inmate programs. Episode 667 (Duration 34:37)

The Kane County Jail’s new Diversion Program is making every effort to leave detainees better off than when they came into the jail.

In This Episode…

“‘Go and get that bad guy’ is actually a bad way to look at our community.” — Sheriff Ron Hain

Sheriff Ron Hain

Ron Hain was elected Sheriff of Kane County in 2018.

As a deputy his number one focus was on gang and drug enforcement. Now, as Sheriff of Kane County, he’s tasked with managing the county jail system and must confront a complicated jail population.

How To Contact The Sheriff of Kane County

Sheriff Ron HainKane County Sheriff’s Office37W755 Route 38St.Charles, Illinois 60175

KaneSheriff.com

“Can’t Miss” Moments:

✓ How “go and get that bad guy” mentality turned into something else. It was drug and gang arrests until the work transformed into a different meaning for Sheriff Hain.  (Go to 2:50)

✓ Doing this over and over helped the Sheriff come to a new understanding about his role in law enforcement. Not everyone will react this way.   (Go to 4:08)

✓ “These are not bad guys they’re people, there citizens. And those high crime neighborhoods are also low income neighborhoods. These are people who have never been giving an opportunity in their life. How did we expect them to turn out?”  (Go to 4:50)

✓ The 3 categories of inmates that fill our jails. Understanding the reason people end up in jail is the first step to really helping them.  (Go to 5:25)

✓ 18 of the 122 corrections officers are specially trained certified officers that help triage and help identify this kind of inmate. The most important cog in the system isn’t even about providing onsite services. The real work begins with an appropriate “exit strategy”.  (Go to 7:37)

✓ When it comes to this “10 is a soft number.” When it comes to assisting others what are your practical limits?   (Go to 9:10)

✓ Lane number 1 in the system overpopulates the jail with this kind of inmate. This is the cog in the entire system. Do noble work here and watch the crime rate plummet.  (Go to 9:40)

✓ This type of inmate is 74 times more likely to die of an overdose upon release. Identifying these inmates is literally life saving information.  (Go to 10:04)

✓ How a 30 person pilot program within a month ballooned to 54 people. The Sheriff won’t say “no” to people in need. You’ll learn all about it in the “Recovery Pod.”  (Go to 10:50)

✓ Here’s a common comment the Sheriff hears: “Hey I don’t want to pay for a criminal’s recovery and addiction programs; they should be paying for it.” Go here to see what the Sheriff says in response.   (Go to 11:38)

✓ How the jailhouse commissary can be used to run down the crime rate…on the outside. No joke and it doesn’t cost Joe Tax Payer a dime.  (Go to 12:50)

✓ If inmates think they’ll take a few classes and g...

Mitchell v. Wisconsin, SCOTUS No. 18–6210, Decided June 27, 2019. Episode 647 (Duration 22:02) (Police can draw blood from unconscious DUI suspect.)

Mitchell v. Wisconsin Says Warrantless Blood Draw By Police Is Legal In Some Circumstances

Unconscious drivers plus natural BAC dissipation create an exigent circumstance for a blood draw.

Unconscious Driver Pose An Elevated Risk

The court said in the case of unconscious drivers, who cannot blow into a breathalyzer, blood tests are essential for achieving the compelling interests of stopping drunk driving.

Indeed, not only is the link to pressing interests here tighter; the interests themselves are greater: Drivers who are drunk enough to pass out at the wheel or soon afterward pose a much greater risk.

For these reasons, there clearly is a “compelling need” for a blood test of drunk-driving suspects whose condition deprives officials of a reasonable opportunity to conduct a breath test.

Exigent Circumstances Exist When There Is Injury or Unconsciousness

Thus, exigency exists when

(1) BAC evidence is dissipating and(2) some other factor creates pressing health, safety, or law enforcement needs that would take priority over a warrant application.

Both conditions are met when a drunk-driving suspect is unconscious, so such suspects, too, a warrantless blood draw is lawful.

See Also

* Mitchell v. Wisconsin, SCOTUS No. 18–6210, Decided June 27, 2019. Episode 647 (Duration 22:02) (Categorical Rule Allows Warrantless Blood Draws From Unconscious Drivers)* Episode 574 – People v. Pratt, 2018 IL App (5th) 170427 (December) (Warrantless blood draw after an accident deemed unconstitutional blood results excluded.)* Episode 469 – Warrantless Blood Draws Coming To A Hospital Near You (A Summary Of Recent Warrantless Blood Draw Cases In Illinois).* Episode 462 – People v. Turner, 2018 IL App (1st) 170204 (February) (good faith exception applies and allows the admissibility of this warrantless blood draw)* Episode 438 – People v. Eubanks, 2017 IL App (1st) 142837 (December) (really bad defendant held down in the hospital)* Episode 461 – People v. Hayes, 2018 IL App (5th) 140223 (February) (defendant was not ticketed so so state could not establish consent to the blood draw)* Episode 558 – People v. Williams, 2018 IL App (2d) 160683 (October) (Challenging this DUI traffic stop went nowhere fast.)*

Episode 643 (Duration 31:51) Illinois attorney Gary True explains the risk involved for anyone who reveals their gun in public.

Licensed and unlicensed gun carriers have something to worry about.

In This Episode…

“A law abiding person that exposes his gun too much, what ever too much is, is subject to being charged and subject to being searched .” — Gary True.

Attorney Gary True

Gary True practices in the areas of business and corporate law, mergers and acquisitions and estate planning.  He also concentrates in the area of self-defense and firearms law. 

Gary is licensed to practice law in Illinois, Missouri and Wisconsin. He also teaches a course for other Illinois conceal carry instructors.

Contact Information 

Gary True515 St. Louis Street, Suite 203Edwardsville, Illinois 62025

Tel: 314.872.0331Fax: [email protected]

http://www.summerscomptonwells.com

“Can’t Miss” Moments:

✓ What does the Illinois Concealed Carry law say about exposing your gun in public? What every properly licensed gun carrier has to be worried about. (Go to 3:58)

✓ This two-word adjective has become a term of art for lawyers and gun owners. Funny how the term is not defined anywhere in the code, and reasonable minds can invent their own working definitions. This is the term we are all waiting for the court to define. (Go to 5:12)

✓ Like it or not, properly licensed gun carriers can still get arrested for carrying a gun if this happens. Here’s a clear example of how not to carry your gun in public…when just a few seconds can get you arrested. (Go to 5:49) & (9:42)

✓ A certain group of gun instructors believe this legal term means something else entirely different than what some Illinois judges say it means. The consequences may be dire for certain people if we don’t all get on the same page. (Go to 7:15)

✓ The absurdity of it…Guy walking down the street and a gust of wind blows his jacket open a bit exposing the butt of his gun. Some say a crime has just been committed.  (Go to 8:25) & (10:00)

✓ This “ordinary common sense” standard is dead. Why the old rules before the current laws existed don’t help us, and in fact, might hurt us. (Go to 8:39)

✓ The real reason you’re likely to get arrested if you are seen with a gun in public.  (Go to 10:00)

✓ WARNING – All gun owners licensed to conceal carry better make sure they understand the “traffic stop” rule. If the officer says these magic words a gun carrier has to respond in the right way or risk getting arrested for providing the wrong answer. (Go to 11:55)

✓ What is NOT in the statute is as important as what is in the statute. Knowing what’s not in there can save you some hassle. There are a lot of unanswered questions about the law, but Gary says there are some clear-cut examples of when an officer cannot stop you even when they know for sure you have a gun.  (Go to 13:16)

✓ 3 serious hints are out there, if you know where to look,