People v. Coleman
Issue Raised on Appeal:
4th Amendment Search and Seizure
People v. Coleman, 2013 IL App (1st) 130030
In that case, Himel’s client, Coleman, was charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. At the trial court level, Himel filed a motion to suppress evidence on the grounds that the search of Coleman’s vehicle was unconstitutional. The trial court granted Himel’s motion and the State appealed the judge’s ruling to the Illinois Appellate Court. On appeal, the State contended that the trial court erred in granting the motion because Coleman, who was on parole at the time of the search, had consented to warrantless searches of his person or property as a condition of his release on parole.
Himel argued at the appellate court that the trial court’s ruling was correct because the officers that searched Coleman’s car didn’t even know that Coleman was on parole at the time they searched his car. The appellate court agreed with Himel stating in the written opinion, “(A)s Coleman points out … if an officer had no knowledge that a person stopped was a parolee, a suspicionless search would be unreasonable.” The judgment of the trial court was affirmed and the case against Coleman was dismissed
