People v. Perkins, 2024 IL App (2d) 230214 (July). Episode 1056 (Duration 8:11)
It is not the number of inaudible portions that adversely affects trustworthiness; instead, it is the reason for the inaudible portions
[Read more…]By Samuel Partida, Jr.
People v. Perkins, 2024 IL App (2d) 230214 (July). Episode 1056 (Duration 8:11)
It is not the number of inaudible portions that adversely affects trustworthiness; instead, it is the reason for the inaudible portions
[Read more…]By Samuel Partida, Jr.
People v. Davis, 2021 IL 126435 (October). Episode 930 (Duration 5:15)
The confidential informant was a participant in the conversation with defendant, so his knowledge of that conversation was not derived from the illegal audio recording.
[Read more…]By Samuel Partida, Jr.
People v. Nevilles, 2021 IL App (3d) 190645 (January). Episode 867 (Duration 5:58)
State authorized overhear does not require that probable cause be spelled out in the required paperwork.
[Read more…]By Samuel Partida, Jr.
People v. Harris, 2020 IL App (3d) 190504 (August). Episode 808 (Duration 7:01)
State concedes error in their use of a secret audio recorder, the court suppressed everything including any testimony concerning the transactions.
[Read more…]By Samuel Partida, Jr.
People v. Davis, 2020 IL App (3d) 190272 (June). Episode 789 (Duration 7:03)
State’s CI recorded another guy who was not the target of the investigation, can they state use the video without the audio?
Read moreBy Samuel Partida, Jr.
People v. Allard, 2018 IL App (2d) 160927 (February). Episode 486 (Duration 9:35)
Lake County State Attorney didn’t sign the applications for the recorded phone calls so they are invalid.
[Read more…]By Samuel Partida, Jr.
Article 14 of the Criminal Code defines the criminal offense of eavesdropping as well as its exemptions. 720 ILCS 5/14-1 et seq.
[Read more…]