People v. Drain

236 N.E.3d 56

2023 IL App (4th) 210355

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.Charles DRAIN, Defendant-Appellant.

NO. 4-21-0355

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District.

Filed March 3, 2023

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Macon County, No. 19CF400, Honorable Thomas E Griffith Jr., Judge Presiding.

Blaire C. Dalton, of Dalton Law, LLC, of Chicago, for appellant.

Scott Rueter, State’s Attorney, of Decatur (Patrick Delfino, David J. Robinson, and Timothy J. Londrigan, of State’s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor’s Office, of counsel), for the People.

OPINION

JUSTICE ZENOFF delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 Following a stipulated bench trial, defendant, Charles Drain, was convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (720 ILCS 570/401(a)(2)(B) (West 2018)). The trial court sentenced defendant to nine years’ imprisonment. Defendant appeals, arguing that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence recovered during a traffic stop and, alternatively, that his counsel provided ineffective assistance in failing to challenge the reliability of a positive canine alert for cocaine inside his vehicle. We affirm.

¶ 2 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 3 We include only those facts necessary to our disposition of the issues raised by defendant. In March 2019, the State charged defendant by information with unlawful possession of 900 grams or more of cocaine with intent to deliver (720 ILCS 570/401(a)(2)(D) (West 2018)) and unlawful possession of a controlled substance (720 ILCS 570/402(a)(2)(D) (West 2018)). The charges arose out of a traffic stop of defendant’s vehicle on March 11, 2019. The police stopped defendant’s vehicle for violating section 11-907(c) of the Illinois Vehicle Code (625 ILCS 5/11-907(c) (West 2018)) (known as Scott’s Law), which requires the driver of a motor vehicle, approaching a stationary emergency vehicle displaying hazard lights, to switch lanes or reduce speed if changing lanes would be impossible or unsafe. Following a positive canine sniff alert, police found cocaine in the trunk. The State later amended the information and proceeded against defendant on one count of unlawful possession of between 100 and 400 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver (720 ILCS 570/401(a)(2)(B) (West 2018)).

¶ 4 In March 2020, defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence. Defendant argued that the traffic stop and vehicle search were illegal and that all statements he made to the police during the stop were inadmissible, pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966).

¶ 5 A hearing on the motion to suppress occurred in October 2020. Deputy Matthew Hunt of the Macon County Sheriff’s Office was the sole witness. Hunt testified to the following. In March 2019, Hunt was a detective and K-9 handler with the criminal interdiction unit. At 11:26 a.m. on March 11, 2019, he was completing a traffic stop involving an unrelated motorist on Interstate 72. Hunt and the motorist were sitting in Hunt’s squad car, which had its emergency lights activated and was parked behind the motorist’s vehicle. Hunt explained that for all traffic stops, he asks drivers to accompany him to his squad car for "safety, clarification on information, community policing," and because it "takes out the question" of what the officer is doing. Upon concluding the stop, Hunt and the motorist got out of the squad car, and Hunt began walking the motorist back to his vehicle.

¶ 6 Hunt testified that, while he and the motorist were between their vehicles, he saw a blue Hyundai Accent, which Hunt later determined was driven by defendant, approaching from behind in the lane closest to them. Hunt explained that Interstate 72 is flat and that nothing obstructed his view of the roadway or the shoulder. As such, he was able to see a "considerable distance" and saw defendant’s vehicle approaching from far away. Hunt testified that as defendant approached, traffic was light. There was a semi-tractor trailer in the lane to the left of defendant’s vehicle, but no other vehicle was in front of or behind either defendant’s vehicle or the semi-tractor trailer. Hunt raised his hand and pointed, indicating to defendant "to get over." However, defendant did not activate his turn signal or move into the lane to his immediate left, and defendant drove by Hunt while still in the lane nearest to him. Hunt testified that the semi-tractor trailer "had almost completely passed [defendant] at that time." Hunt acknowledged that as defendant’s vehicle passed the squad car, defendant’s brake lights were activated.

¶ 7 People’s exhibit 1 was played for the trial court. People’s exhibit 1, which this court has reviewed, is a video of Hunt’s traffic stop of the unrelated motorist, as depicted by both a camera pointing out the front of Hunt’s squad car (front camera) and a camera pointed toward the interior of the squad car depicting the front and back seats (interior camera). In the relevant portion of the video, the interior camera depicts Hunt in the driver’s seat filling out a warning and speaking with the motorist, who is sitting in the passenger seat. The roadway can be seen through the squad car’s windows. The weather conditions are clear and sunny. At 11:26:26 a.m., Hunt exits his squad car with the motorist to escort him back to his vehicle. The front camera shows that, while Hunt and the motorist are standing between their vehicles, Hunt looks behind his squad car for several seconds. He raises his hand to point, signaling to an oncoming vehicle to switch lanes. At 11:26:38 a.m., a semi-tractor trailer and defendant’s vehicle appear in frame of the interior camera, approaching the squad car from behind. Defendant’s vehicle is in the lane closest to the squad car, and the semi-tractor trailer is in the lane to the left of defendant’s vehicle. As defendant’s vehicle passes the squad car, it is adjacent to the back of the trailer being hauled by the semi-tractor trailer such that the trailer is nearly clear of defendant’s vehicle. The front camera shows that, as defendant drives by the squad car, defendant’s brake lights are activated.

¶ 8 Hunt testified that he determined that defendant had committed a traffic violation, so he got into his squad car and followed defendant’s vehicle to initiate a stop. People’s exhibit 2, which was played for the trial court and has been reviewed by this court, is a recording of the stop as depicted by the front camera and interior camera. The stop occurred at 11:31 a.m. on the shoulder of the interstate. Hunt testified that he approached the passenger side of defendant’s vehicle and asked defendant for his license and proof of insurance. Defendant handed Hunt his license and— because the vehicle was a rental—the rental agreement. Hunt testified that he informed defendant that he would only issue a warning and told defendant, "I’m going to have you come back to my squad car." Hunt testified that he was armed, but he did not have his gun drawn. Hunt did not handcuff defendant. Defendant followed Hunt and sat in the front passenger seat of the squad car while Hunt sat in the driver’s seat. As Hunt and defendant got into the squad car, defendant told Hunt that he did not know that he needed to move over while passing a squad car.

¶ 9 Hunt testified that he began reviewing the rental agreement and running "all the record checks," which included checking defendant’s license and registration, checking for any warrants, and reviewing defendant’s criminal history. Hunt explained that he had a computer in his squad car with access to LEADS, which is used to check registrations, names, dates of birth, and warrants. Each check requires a separate inquiry to be run. Hunt testified that he began running those searches.

¶ 10 People’s exhibit 2 showed that, while Hunt ran those searches, he asked defendant where he was going. Defendant responded that he was going to Macon to visit his grandmother, who was sick. Defendant also stated that he planned to spend the night there, but he told Hunt that he did not have an overnight bag with him, Hunt testified that defendant "didn’t appear to be comfortable" while speaking with him. Hunt explained that defendant "wasn’t moving a whole lot," and "his breathing appeared *** to kind of intensify" as they talked. Hunt asked defendant if he was "all right" because he was breathing heavily, and defendant responded that he was "out of shape." Hunt testified that several chimes could be heard on the video from his squad car computer, and he explained that they were responses being returned from the inquiries he was running.

¶ 11 At 11:39:16 a.m., Hunt told defendant, "Your license looks good to go." At 11:39:20 a.m., Hunt told defendant that he was going to write a warning, and he began to fill it out. As Hunt did so, he asked defendant if he was ever arrested for anything. Defendant responded that he had a misdemeanor from when he was 17. Hunt testified, however, that upon running a criminal history check, he learned that defendant’s criminal history included additional offenses.

¶ 12 People’s exhibit 2 showed that, while Hunt was still in the process of writing the warning, Officer Wolfe arrived at the scene, approached Hunt’s squad car, and began asking defendant where he was going. At 11:41:57 a.m., Hunt asked Wolfe to finish writing the warning. Hunt testified that he did so because he had decided to conduct a canine sniff around defendant’s vehicle. People’s exhibit 2 showed that between 11:39:20 a.m., when Hunt began writing the warning, and 11:41:57 a.m., when he asked Wolfe to continue writing it, Hunt was continuously filling out the warning. Hunt testified that he could not recall how much of the warning he had written when he asked Wolfe to take over.

¶ 13 Hunt testified that he asked defendant, "Is it okay if I run the dog around?" and that defendant consented. While Wolfe continued writing the warning, Hunt...