Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 04:38 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 04:38 PM Hello everyone. Long time reader on the forum, new member. I am in quite the situation here! Long story short, I was stopped a few months back with my GF coming back from an engagement party. We were stopped by a squad on allegations that a domestic was occurring, which did not happen. During questioning they were informed by my GF that did not occur and nothing was going on. The police kept us there after we asked if we were free to leave and they said we were not because they were still conducting an investigation based on what they thought they observed. I believe that once she dismissed the assumptions they should have been cleared to leave and the Terry stop was dismissed. During questioning they asked for my ID and eventually found that I had a CCL and then I was asked if I was carrying, which I was and followed their instructions to a T. I was eventually charged with a CCL while intoxicated based on their investigation. Been to court 2x now and the SA would no drop it so my lawyer advised me it would be best to do a bench trial, which is scheduled in 3 months. I did not have the weapon on me at the party, I retrieved it from my vehicle as I didn't want to leave it overnight and then ran back to help my GF at which point we were stopped, a feet away from the hotel. No priors on my record. Just yesterday I received a notification from ISP that my FOID is revoked and CCL is suspended based on the pending case. I went in right away to the PD and surrendered both IDs. The officer that was taking down the info was threatening to arrest me as I did not have the serials on hand and advised me I was not free to leave. Also told me I was already past the 48hrs because he looked at the date the letter was written. I showed him on the document he handed me which was bold and underlined that you have 48 to surrender them from receiving the notification. I have no idea how he expected me to do so when the letter will obviously not be delivered the same day. He ended up calling the ISP and they told him otherwise and then told me I can leave and come back with the info of the serials and who had possession of the firearms. Came back a half hour later with all the required info and then was on my merry way. I read through the statue and it doesn't say anything about either being suspended during a pending case, much less on a first offense, which I was not convicted of anything at this time. I also looked over and to my understanding of the revocation statue, I do not fall within the grounds of suspension or revocation. I am going to appeal it with ISP and will have letters as stated in the appeal requirements. My lawyer advised me that the court wouldn't have submitted that to ISP until the case that I was found guilty so the PD must have and likely informed them that I was a danger to the public, or something along the lines of that. I am not sure what more can be done on my part and what actions I should take. Any advice would be very helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:03 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:03 PM Have domestic charges been brought against you? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigcelia Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:06 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:06 PM Wow, bummer situation there. Is your attorney knowledgeable in firearm laws? Are you a member of the Illinois State Rifle Association? I would contemplate calling the ISRA HQ at 815-635-3198, ask them to refer you to an attorney that is knowledgeable in firearm laws, if you wanted to go that route just for the FOID/CCL issue. They have a referral system in place. I believe Illinoiscarry also has a list posted here somewhere as well pinned to a page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCroskey Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:09 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:09 PM If you were intoxicated and driving home, why didn't they charge you with DWI? There's a lot I don't understand about this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigcelia Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:09 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:09 PM Have domestic charges been brought against you? Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkOP mentioned this above: "I was eventually charged with a CCL while intoxicated" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IH8IL Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:33 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:33 PM Where did this happen? Seems like that pd is going after you from reading what you posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:38 PM Author Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:38 PM I was only charged with the CCW violation. They did a PBT test which I ended up blowing just slightly over the legal limit as referenced in 11-501. I was not charged with a domestic. We were walking to the hotel and the car never left the parking lot. The only reason I blew was because I did not feel that I was intoxicated and figured I would just blow and get on my way, which was a mistake. In there report there is no mention of me appearing to be impaired, only glossy bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol. I did get a drink spill on me at the party, which is neither here nor there. I do not drink frequently, and especially never when I'm carrying. Again, I wasn't carrying the weapon going to or from the party which I guess doesn't really matter because at the time I was stopped it was on my person. Based on 11-501, the PBT is not admissible in a criminal case so that should not be able to be used against me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:41 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:41 PM If you were intoxicated and driving home, why didn't they charge you with DWI? There's a lot I don't understand about this... OP said it was a Terry stop, not a traffic stop. ^^^Edit, OP clarified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:42 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:42 PM I was only charged with the CCW violation. They did a PBT test which I ended up blowing just slightly over the legal limit as referenced in 11-501. I was not charged with a domestic. We were walking to the hotel and the car never left the parking lot. The only reason I blew was because I did not feel that I was intoxicated and figured I would just blow and get on my way, which was a mistake. In there report there is no mention of me appearing to be impaired, only glossy bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol. I did get a drink spill on me at the party, which is neither here nor there. I do not drink frequently, and especially never when I'm carrying. Again, I wasn't carrying the weapon going to or from the party which I guess doesn't really matter because at the time I was stopped it was on my person. Based on 11-501, the PBT is not admissible in a criminal case so that should not be able to be used against me. So you blew over the legal limit of .08? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:44 PM Author Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:44 PM Where did this happen? Seems like that pd is going after you from reading what you posted.I spoke with maybe at least 8 lawyers when I was first shopping around and all agreed that it sounds like BS and they were on a fishing expedition and eventually got something. It's seems very clear to me that they were 100% motivated on getting a domestic out of it. Never harmed her in anyway, I was helping her walk and was holding her up by her left arm as we were walking and then got stopped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:50 PM Author Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:50 PM I was only charged with the CCW violation. They did a PBT test which I ended up blowing just slightly over the legal limit as referenced in 11-501. I was not charged with a domestic. We were walking to the hotel and the car never left the parking lot. The only reason I blew was because I did not feel that I was intoxicated and figured I would just blow and get on my way, which was a mistake. In there report there is no mention of me appearing to be impaired, only glossy bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol. I did get a drink spill on me at the party, which is neither here nor there. I do not drink frequently, and especially never when I'm carrying. Again, I wasn't carrying the weapon going to or from the party which I guess doesn't really matter because at the time I was stopped it was on my person. Based on 11-501, the PBT is not admissible in a criminal case so that should not be able to be used against me. So you blew over the legal limit of .08? According to their device, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock23 Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:56 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:56 PM According to their device, yes. In that respect, then, I'd say you're screwed. Per the vehicle code Section 11-501.2 ( b ) 3, regarding any criminal/civil trial action taken: If there was at that time an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more, it shall be presumed that the person was under the influence of alcohol. Not really much to argue your way out of, there.... That being said, assuming this is your first and only violation of the FCCA, and you were only charged with carrying while intoxicated, then it should only be a Class A misdemeanor; no suspension of your FOID and/or CCL. That punishment is reserved for 2nd offenses. A licensee in violation of this subsection (d) shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor for a first or second violation and a Class 4 felony for a third violation. The Department may suspend a license for up to 6 months for a second violation and shall permanently revoke a license for a third violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:59 PM Author Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 05:59 PM A licensee in violation of this subsection (d) shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor for a first or second violation and a Class 4 felony for a third violation. The Department may suspend a license for up to 6 months for a second violation and shall permanently revoke a license for a third violation. Which is why I am not understanding why it was suspended/revoked. And I have not been convicted of anything at this time. Which is why I am not understanding why it was suspended/revoked. And I have not been convicted of anything at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:05 PM Author Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:05 PM Might not have any weight, but something I found. These machines typically function by measuring a chemical reaction of alcohol in a fuel cell. These fuel cell alcohol detectors are highly susceptible to a variety of factors that can cause them to produce incorrect BAC results. Things such as the temperature of the machine, the outside air temperature, when you last consumed alcohol, medical conditions, and many other factors will affect the validity of the PBT test results.Generally, the police are not allowed to testify that a PBT gave a specific alcohol reading. Instead, they are typically allowed to testify that the PBT results indicated the presence of alcohol. Illinois courts do not recognize that the PBT machines are scientifically reliable beyond detecting the presence of alcohol My issue here is why I was revoked on this, especially for a first offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hipshot Percussion Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:17 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:17 PM My questions to the Lawyers here... If he was stopped for a crime that wasn't being committed, how can he be charged with something discovered during a stop that shouldn't have take place? If they didn't charge him with the domestic, they had no right to stop him... no? Isn't that nothing more than a hunch? Isn't that the 'fruit of the poison tree'? No?' Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:22 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:22 PM Not really much to argue your way out of, there.... That being said, assuming this is your first and only violation of the FCCA, and you were only charged with carrying while intoxicated, then it should only be a Class A misdemeanor; no suspension of your FOID and/or CCL. That punishment is reserved for 2nd offenses. My thoughts too . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:26 PM Author Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:26 PM My questions to the Lawyers here... If he was stopped for a crime that wasn't being committed, how can he be charged with something discovered during a stop that shouldn't have take place? If they didn't charge him with the domestic, they had no right to stop him... no? Isn't that nothing more than a hunch? Isn't that the 'fruit of the poison tree'? No?' Just curious.That's what I was told by an officer I know and he agrees with me on that. Occurring to me that my defense is not as hard driving as I thought and is not really being proactive in my eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:42 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:42 PM I think you'll have a really, really hard time making the case the Terry stop was unwarranted. They really need very little PC to do that, especially if they were responding to a call. Mitigation is what you should seek now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:49 PM Author Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 06:49 PM I think you'll have a really, really hard time making the case the Terry stop was unwarranted. They really need very little PC to do that, especially if they were responding to a call. Mitigation is what you should seek now. Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkWell that's the thing, they weren't called. They stopped based on what they thought they observed. Which is why it doesn't make sense. Had they been called then they would have been fine to continue the investigation but I ran up to her just as they were coming up the street and stopped us based on their observations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoYouFeelLucky Posted October 28, 2016 at 09:09 PM Share Posted October 28, 2016 at 09:09 PM If they saw you running up to a woman on the street or in a parking lot then they had probable cause to stop and investigate. All they have to say is it looked like you were approaching her in a threatening manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fife Posted October 29, 2016 at 06:38 PM Share Posted October 29, 2016 at 06:38 PM If you refuse to blow into the PBT while driving, you are automatically assumed guilty. Is this the same if you were not driving? Are you required to blow if carrying? Also, where did this happen, which police dept? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiTown Posted October 30, 2016 at 08:05 AM Share Posted October 30, 2016 at 08:05 AM As you stated you were physically helping your GF to the car and at one point even ran up on her. This could easily be interpreted as aggressive behavior from an outside perspective thus giving rise to reasonable suspicion of a crime being or about to be committed. Your GF's immediate dismissal of any action does NOT automatically remove such RS as it is common for abused spouses to deny such actions to protect their abusers. That's why the stop continued even though your GF stated no abuse was occurring. Since they suspected you of a crime they can and usually will perform a name check. This revealed your CCL status and along with the officer's observations of your intoxication led you to be tested on a pbt and ultimately arrested for carrying while intoxicated. Your lawyer will have to argue and convince the judge or jury that your initial actions did not create RS in the first place thus making the stop unlawful and any evidence recovered during the stop to be inadmissible. If they fail at that they must argue to the judge or jury that you were not intoxicated. As to why you were suspended prior to conviction, ISP should be able to explain that to you no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
67vtx1800 Posted October 30, 2016 at 04:16 PM Share Posted October 30, 2016 at 04:16 PM If all the facts presented are true, then we have clear proof that the carry while intoxicated provision is total horse piss. According to what is written the weapon was not an issue until the police made it so. And only on some trumped up bull****. Not their fault, as they only enforce the absolutely insane laws our elected officials create. The FCCL is nothing short of a mess with too many ways to turn an otherwise legal activity into something illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitter Clinger Posted October 30, 2016 at 09:12 PM Share Posted October 30, 2016 at 09:12 PM I'm very concerned with this situation and other instances like this one that I've read on this forum. It seems that in Illinois, they can use almost any excuse to take your rights away and confiscate all your firearms. This is not right. As a 2nd amendment supporter, it really makes me want to leave this state as soon as possible to avoid persecution. There have been too many people here and probably far more that we haven't heard about who's rights have been stolen and lives turned upside down by the absurd and unconstitutional rules of Illinois. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fife Posted October 30, 2016 at 09:24 PM Share Posted October 30, 2016 at 09:24 PM Maybe we need the NRA, ISRA, SAF et al. to step up and sue Illinois, and recoup their big checks at some later date in the future. At the least it would put our gun rights in the spotlight again, front page news. If they don't learn once and for all what "shall not be infringed" means, then they will continue forever. Me thinks they need a good spank down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 30, 2016 at 09:47 PM Author Share Posted October 30, 2016 at 09:47 PM Maybe I misspoke, when I said I ran over to her, I did not mean I rushed her. It was more of a speed walk and I don't think they would have seen me approaching her anyway. I got to her and took her by her arm and then we started walking back which is when they lit us up. I am fairly confident that all they saw was me holding her. The fact of the matter is the weapon was not in anyway related to the stop, it was just that they happened to find it, "fruit of the poison tree". But the point of this post was to try to find out what grounds ISP had to revoke my FOID and suspend CCL. I tried calling several times and I get the voicemail immediately. I feel that even if I was hypothetically found not guilty, it would still be a battle and take an extensive amount of time to get the FOID back. It's just sad that you are immediately treated like a criminal and stripped of your rights, and they don't even follow their own laws. I was reading a post some time ago from a gentlemen that was charged with a domestic and later found not guilty. Then 2 years later and going to court several times for the judge to order ISP to release his FOID, despite the charge having nothing to do with the weapon but obviously they can revoke your FOID for a domestic charge. In either case, if anyone ever gets involved in a situation with a firearm you're already screwed or slightly less screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fife Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:48 PM Share Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:48 PM Apexcarver, what town was this in? Are you a member of any pro-gun rights group? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tango7 Posted October 31, 2016 at 12:14 AM Share Posted October 31, 2016 at 12:14 AM I'm very concerned with this situation and other instances like this one that I've read on this forum. It seems that in Illinois, they can use almost any excuse to take your rights away and confiscate all your firearms. This is not right. As a 2nd amendment supporter, it really makes me want to leave this state as soon as possible to avoid persecution. There have been too many people here and probably far more that we haven't heard about who's rights have been stolen and lives turned upside down by the absurd and unconstitutional rules of Illinois. I feel that even if I was hypothetically found not guilty, it would still be a battle and take an extensive amount of time to get the FOID back. It's just sad that you are immediately treated like a criminal and stripped of your rights, and they don't even follow their own laws. Consider how many millions of $$$ Chicago spent prosecuting then defending laws they had to know were UC, and the thousands of FOID applicants and renewals that were delayed two or three times the 30 days specified in the Act. When you have a bottomless purse to keep those serfs in line, why spare any expense, or make the job easier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted October 31, 2016 at 03:03 AM Share Posted October 31, 2016 at 03:03 AM A licensee in violation of this subsection (d) shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor for a first or second violation and a Class 4 felony for a third violation. The Department may suspend a license for up to 6 months for a second violation and shall permanently revoke a license for a third violation. Which is why I am not understanding why it was suspended/revoked. And I have not been convicted of anything at this time. Which is why I am not understanding why it was suspended/revoked. And I have not been convicted of anything at this time. An inquiry is being made into why the FOID/CCL was revoked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apexcarver Posted October 31, 2016 at 03:17 AM Author Share Posted October 31, 2016 at 03:17 AM Apexcarver, what town was this in? Are you a member of any pro-gun rights group?Not sure that I want to share the town. But no, not apart of any pro-gun right groups but now is a better time than ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.