Legal Opinion · Concurrence

People v. Sparks

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided August 3, 2000No. 4—99—0561, 4—99—0622 consPublished

1Concurrence

PRESIDING JUSTICE COOK,

specially concurring:

The State wants the best of both worlds in this case. It wants to treat the informant here as anonymous and justify the stop as a Terry stop. Yet it wants us to recognize the veracity of the informant because the detectives knew the informant from another case.

During oral argument, counsel for defendant Sparks suggested that, if anything, this was an arrest based on probable cause. I agree. This was not a temporary investigative detention, lasting no longer than necessary to effectuate the purpose of the stop. Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491, 75 L.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Florida v. RoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. People v. CrissAppellate Court of Illinois · 1998
  3. People v. VauzangesIllinois Supreme Court · 1994
  4. People v. ChaneyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API