holding that where officer "never testified that he believed that he had probable cause to search the car or the purse," and where "record offer[ed] only one reason," the driver's consent, for the officer's search of the vehicle, then "State must find refuge in [the 33 driver's] consent to the officer's search of the vehicle," and not in probable cause to search.
How later courts described this case
- holding that where officer "never testified that he believed that he had probable cause to search the car or the purse," and where "record offer[ed] only one reason," the driver's consent, for the officer's search of the vehicle, then "State must find refuge in [the 33 driver's] consent to the officer's search of the vehicle," and not in probable cause to search.
- suppressing evidence obtained pursuant to the search of a passenger's belongings where the passenger was unaware of the driver's consent to search the vehicle, did not know the officer's purpose for the search, and was unaware that she was being asked to exit the vehicle so that officers could search it
- holding that a purse left behind in a vehicle has not been abandoned when a passenger gets out of the vehicle at the request or command of a police officer
- ordering the Fifth District to vacate its order denying the defendant's forum non conveniens motion to transfer venue and ordering the Madison County circuit court to transfer venue
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
JUSTICE HEIPLE, dissenting:
I dissent for the reasons adequately expressed in the majority opinion of the appellate court which this court now reverses. 242 Ill. App. 3d 675 .