In Urbana, Illinois
I was pulled over leaving a bar one night, Officer asked me to perform some pre-exit tests- I did. Officer then asks me to step out for field sobriety testing- again I did.
As soon as I exit the vehicle the officer says he will first "pat me down for weapons". Officer then felt "what appeared to be a film cannister" in my front pocket and retrieved it. Inside that cannister was about two tenths of a gram of marijuana. I say "Your'e not going to arrest me for that are you". He responds " No, i'm more concerned with your ability to drive". He then continues with field sobriety tests. Which I'm sure I passed( I'm a non drinker, and I wasn't "high").
After field sobriety I was arrested for D.U.I. Because I am non drinker, I gladly submitted to chemical testing (ignorant, ignorant, ignorant). Low and behold my blood and urine tested positive for T.H.C. (did I mention ignorant)
Here's where it gets kind of crazy. Filed motion to supress the cannabis seized in violation of Terry v. Ohio. During the supression hearing, when asked why he searched the defendant the officer stated, "Because I search everyone I come in contact with". The Judge interjects at that point and say's " You mean when your'e on a dark lonely street and the defendant is making furtive gesture's and you genuinely have a concern for your safety or the safety of others". That is when you "pat them down".
The officer responds " No, I search everyone I come into contact with". (Cha Ching--Wrong answer, I'm outta here-- Um not so fast). The Judge then admonishes the officer about his policy, then informs the State's attorney what a valid Terry frisk is (I'm so outta here). Then the Judge with no prompting from the State's Attorney say's " So that brings us to the business of inevitable discovery".
Wihout another word from the State's attorney the Judge argues that the Marijuana would have been dicovered inevitably when the police arrested me. I argued that it was not the discovery of the marijuana that was inevitable upon a lawful arrest. It was the arrest upon the unlawful discovery of the marijuana that was inevitable.
To make a long story as short as I can, (I could literally write a book about this). The marijuana stayed, The fruit of that poisonous tree(the blood test) was in. Then a jury of my peers rather quickly convicted me. And oh yeah, I saw it coming.
Is it just me, or did I get shafted here?
p.s. Forgot to mention that even though there were motions to supress on file, and a motion to dismiss on file weeks before the trial date we never had a hearing on those motions untill after we impanelled a jury. Since the motions would have been case dispositive if I prevailed I took that as a very bad sign.
Inevitable Discovery, Are you kidding me?
sorrry for the long post, feedback appreciated

