Case Law People v. Hood

People v. Hood

Document Cited Authorities (37) Cited in (21) Related
OPINION

PRESIDING JUSTICE GRIFFIN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

¶ 1 Following a bench trial, defendant Patrick Hood was convicted of aggravated unlawful use or possession of a weapon (AUUW) without a valid Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) Card or concealed carry license (CCL) ( 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1) (West 2014)) and sentenced to eight years' imprisonment. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court erred by denying his pretrial motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence because police lacked reasonable suspicion to justify a stop pursuant to Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). He also challenges various monetary fines and fees assessed by the court. For the following reasons, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court of Cook County and remand as to the fines, fees, and costs order.

¶ 2 I. BACKGROUND

¶ 3 Defendant was charged with violating the armed habitual criminal statute (count I), unlawful use or possession of a weapon by a felon (UUWF) (counts II, III, IV, and V), and AUUW (counts VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, and XI), stemming from his December 4, 2014, possession of a handgun while he was seated inside his vehicle. Prior to trial, defendant moved to suppress evidence of the gun, arguing that police lacked probable cause to search his car and seize the gun because he was not violating any laws at the time of the search. He also argued that his "arrest, search, and seizure" were made in violation of his fourth amendment rights.

¶ 4 A. Suppression Hearing
¶ 5 1. Testimony of Officer Nick Beckman

¶ 6 At the suppression hearing, Chicago police officer Nick Beckman testified that, on December 4, 2014, at around 6:30 a.m., he was seated in the front seat of an unmarked police car with "municipal plates," driving westbound in the vicinity of the 3900 block of West Grenshaw Street, a one-way eastbound street. Officer Beckman described the area as "a very high narcotic area." The sun was not out yet, but streetlights were on. Officer Beckman was wearing plain clothes and a vest with his flashlight attached. As the officers were driving, Officer Beckman noticed defendant sitting in the driver's seat of a Pontiac Bonneville, which was parked facing eastbound on Grenshaw. Inside the Bonneville were also a woman, later identified as Quenisha Mason, who was seated in the front passenger seat, and a man, later identified as Michael Neal, who was seated in the rear passenger seat. Officer Beckman could not recall whether the dome light was on in the car. A man, later identified as Marcus Steward, was standing outside of defendant's vehicle holding money. Officer Beckman's partner, Officer Matthew Gallagher, stopped the police car facing defendant's car, approximately 15 to 25 feet away. At that time, Officer Beckman saw Steward look at the police car then quickly place the money he was holding into his pocket. Officer Beckman also saw defendant "making movements towards the bottom of his seat while he was seated." It appeared to Officer Beckman that defendant was retrieving something from the floorboard.

¶ 7 Defendant's behavior was "suspicious" to Officer Beckman, so he quickly exited the police car and "jogged" to defendant's car because "there was an officer safety issue at that point." As he approached, Officer Beckman illuminated the driver's side of defendant's car with his flashlight and observed defendant placing a two-toned handgun into a plastic bag. Defendant then tossed the bag to the rear of his car. Upon seeing defendant toss the bag, Officer Beckman quickly opened the driver's side door and "took hold" of defendant. Officer Clarke briefly detained defendant while Officer Gallagher recovered the bag containing the gun from the backseat of the car. The gun, a two-tone Smith and Wesson, loaded with 11 live rounds, was the same gun that Officer Beckman had observed defendant holding in his lap.

¶ 8 Officer Beckman acknowledged that he did not witness any illegal transactions occur. He further acknowledged he did not have an arrest warrant or search warrant for defendant or his car. The incident, from the time Officer Gallagher stopped the car until Officer Beckman approached defendant's window, took "seconds."

¶ 9 2. Testimony of Marcus Steward

¶ 10 Marcus Steward testified that, on the day in question, he was getting off work and had received a call from defendant. They were "meeting up" to discuss what they were going to do that day. He had known defendant for several years from their neighborhood. Defendant was in his car and Steward was standing outside the passenger side. As he was speaking with defendant, the police arrived. The officers drove the wrong way on Grenshaw, a one-way street. Steward knew they were officers when they exited their car. The officers approached the driver's side of defendant's car and pulled defendant and the other occupants out of the car. Steward denied seeing defendant with a gun or throwing anything into the back seat.

¶ 11 Steward could not recall whether he had money in his hand. He denied that the police used a flashlight. Although he was standing nearby when the police went into defendant's car, he did not see them remove a gun. He testified he did not pay attention to the police. Steward acknowledged he had a prior conviction for possession of a controlled substance.

¶ 123. Ruling on the Motion to Suppress

¶ 13 Following arguments, the court denied defendant's motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence. In denying the motion, the court recounted the evidence, noting that the officers were driving the wrong direction on Grenshaw prior to observing defendant's car. The court found Officer Beckman credible and Steward's credibility "strained." The court concluded:

"In any event, the officer that was credible that I believe actually saw the gun in [defendant's] hand as he approached the car, I believe seeing [defendant] attempting to conceal the gun and get rid of it from his own possession as best he could, I believe had probable cause to then recover the gun."

¶ 14 Following the denial of his motion to suppress, defendant filed a motion to reconsider, arguing that the mere presence of a gun is not a crime, and therefore, its warrantless seizure was not supported by probable cause. Defendant emphasized that there was no evidence presented regarding whether he had a valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card or concealed carry license at the time of his seizure. The case proceeded to a joint hearing on defendant's motion to reconsider and bench trial.

¶ 15 B. Joint Hearing and Bench Trial
¶ 16 1. Testimony of Officer Beckman

¶ 17 Officer Beckman's testimony at trial was substantially the same as his testimony at the suppression hearing. He added that, on the relevant date, he was working with Chicago police officers Gallagher, Clarke, and Urbanski. All four officers were driving in the same unmarked car. When they stopped in front of defendant's car, defendant was making "quick, furtive movements toward what appeared to be the floorboard area as [if] he was retrieving something." After Officer Beckman approached defendant's side of the car, he saw defendant toss the bag containing the gun. Clarke assisted Officer Beckman in detaining defendant. Officer Beckman then alerted the other officers that "there was a gun thrown." The officers subsequently ordered the other two passengers, Mason and Neal, out of the car. They were briefly detained for investigation. Officer Beckman directed Officer Gallagher to the black plastic bag, which Officer Gallagher recovered from the back seat. The bag contained the gun. Only seconds elapsed between Officer Beckman seeing defendant place the gun in the bag and toss it, and when Officer Gallagher recovered the gun.

¶ 18 On cross-examination, Officer Beckman testified that, initially, his attention was caught by Steward holding money and then quickly placing it in his pocket and defendant's furtive movements. Officer Beckman thought defendant was possibly armed based on his movements, although he could not recall whether he noted that in defendant's arrest report. He believed he wrote in the report that there was an officer safety issue "at some point." He acknowledged that he wrote in the report that he approached defendant's car for a field interview. Officer Beckman clarified he approached the car for a field interview because he was in a high narcotics area and deemed the activity he saw to be suspicious.

¶ 19 Officer Beckman further acknowledged that, when he initially observed defendant with the gun, he did not know whether defendant had a valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card or concealed carry license. After the gun was recovered, Officer Beckman asked defendant whether he had a concealed carry license, and defendant responded "no." He did not give defendant Miranda warnings prior to asking whether defendant had a concealed carry license. At the time Officer Beckman asked about the concealed carry license, defendant was in custody and not free to leave.

¶ 20 2. Testimony of Officer Matthew Gallagher

¶ 21 Officer Matthew Gallagher testified that he stopped the squad car and approached the passenger side of defendant's vehicle, while Clarke and Officer Beckman approached the driver's side. At some point, Officer Beckman told Officer Gallagher there was a "143 Adam," which is a police term for a weapons violation. After receiving the code about the gun, Officer Gallagher ordered Neal out of the rear passenger seat. Officer Gallagher subsequently found a black plastic bag containing a Smith and Wesson handgun with 11 live rounds, including a round in the chamber. There were no other items in the back seat of the car. Officer...

5 cases
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2021
People v. Padilla
"...we can affirm the trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress on any basis appearing in the record. People v. Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 39, 444 Ill.Dec. 218, 163 N.E.3d 781.¶ 92 In People v. Wilson , 228 Ill. 2d 35, 52, 319 Ill.Dec. 353, 885 N.E.2d 1033 (2008), the supreme court u..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2023
People v. Wallace
"...possessed the gun. See McMichaels, 2019 IL App (1st) 163053, ¶ 38, 445 Ill.Dec. 325, 166 N.E.3d 755; People v. Hood, 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 71, 444 Ill.Dec. 218, 163 N.E.3d 781. Absolute certainty was not required, and the frisk in this case was no more than necessary to secure officer..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2021
People v. Jenkins
"...suspicion" that defendant's gun possession was unlawful or that he was planning a crime. See People v. Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 71, 444 Ill.Dec. 218, 163 N.E.3d 781 (defendant's "efforts to conceal and toss the gun" when encounter with police became imminent established reasonable..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2024
People v. Mathis
"... ... suppression is warranted under those facts." In re ... Rafeal E. , 2014 IL App (1st) 133027, ¶ 14 (citing ... People v. Hopkins , 235 Ill.2d 453, 471 (2009)) ... "In doing so, we may consider evidence adduced in both ... the suppression hearing and at trial." People v ... Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 39 (citing ... People v. Richardson , 234 Ill.2d 233, 252 (2009)) ...          ¶ ... 62 Defendant argues police lacked probable cause because ... there was no indication Jackson was a reliable witness, ... police did nothing to confirm the reliability ... "
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2024
People v. Dunn
"... ... relief should be granted" People v. Hackett , ... 2012 IL 111781, ¶ 18. We review de novo the ... trial court's ultimate legal ruling as to whether ... suppression was warranted and may consider evidence from the ... suppression hearing and the trial. Id. ; People ... v. Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶¶ 38-39 ...          ¶ ... 37 A. INVESTIGATIVE STOP ...          ¶ ... 38 Defendant first contends that the stop in this case was ... not justified at its inception, and, therefore, he was ... unlawfully seized ...          ¶ ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2021
People v. Padilla
"...we can affirm the trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress on any basis appearing in the record. People v. Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 39, 444 Ill.Dec. 218, 163 N.E.3d 781.¶ 92 In People v. Wilson , 228 Ill. 2d 35, 52, 319 Ill.Dec. 353, 885 N.E.2d 1033 (2008), the supreme court u..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2023
People v. Wallace
"...possessed the gun. See McMichaels, 2019 IL App (1st) 163053, ¶ 38, 445 Ill.Dec. 325, 166 N.E.3d 755; People v. Hood, 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 71, 444 Ill.Dec. 218, 163 N.E.3d 781. Absolute certainty was not required, and the frisk in this case was no more than necessary to secure officer..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2021
People v. Jenkins
"...suspicion" that defendant's gun possession was unlawful or that he was planning a crime. See People v. Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 71, 444 Ill.Dec. 218, 163 N.E.3d 781 (defendant's "efforts to conceal and toss the gun" when encounter with police became imminent established reasonable..."
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2024
People v. Mathis
"... ... suppression is warranted under those facts." In re ... Rafeal E. , 2014 IL App (1st) 133027, ¶ 14 (citing ... People v. Hopkins , 235 Ill.2d 453, 471 (2009)) ... "In doing so, we may consider evidence adduced in both ... the suppression hearing and at trial." People v ... Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶ 39 (citing ... People v. Richardson , 234 Ill.2d 233, 252 (2009)) ...          ¶ ... 62 Defendant argues police lacked probable cause because ... there was no indication Jackson was a reliable witness, ... police did nothing to confirm the reliability ... "
Document | Appellate Court of Illinois – 2024
People v. Dunn
"... ... relief should be granted" People v. Hackett , ... 2012 IL 111781, ¶ 18. We review de novo the ... trial court's ultimate legal ruling as to whether ... suppression was warranted and may consider evidence from the ... suppression hearing and the trial. Id. ; People ... v. Hood , 2019 IL App (1st) 162194, ¶¶ 38-39 ...          ¶ ... 37 A. INVESTIGATIVE STOP ...          ¶ ... 38 Defendant first contends that the stop in this case was ... not justified at its inception, and, therefore, he was ... unlawfully seized ...          ¶ ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex