People v. Carter, 2016 IL App (3d) 140958 (March). Episode 157 (Duration 4:44)
The discovery of this gun exceeded the scope of the search warrant, thus it was suppressed.
Here, the police had a search warrant for the search of a duplex.
It was specifically citing the search for drugs. Drugs are found in the unit of the non-target. After that person is arrested he tells police that Defendant has a gun in his couch. However, the search of defendant’s unit had already ended and the officers left the unit.
They came back a few minutes later without a new warrant.
…and found the gun in the couch.
Defendant argued that the execution of the search warrant had concluded and the officers made an illegal reentry and conducted an illegal search for an item not specified in the search warrant.
The rule is that a warrant is executed when a search is conducted, and its legal validity expires upon execution, so that after execution, no additional search can be undertaken on the same warrant.
Reentry would therefore require some other legally sound justification or a new warrant.
The State argues such justification is found in the doctrine of inevitable discovery. However, nothing in record can be used to suggest that this gun would have been found.
Further, the State’s assertion that discovery of the gun was inevitable because the police were capable of acquiring a second warrant is not persuasive and also flies in the face of the purpose of obtaining a warrant.