A SKOKIE CRIMINAL LAWYER EXPLAINS THE LAW 1-847-568-0160

            The fight started at the bar.  Both you and the other guy were throwing punches, but you only got involved to try to stop the original fight.  Now you are charged with aggravated battery.

            Can you claim self defense?

In Illinois, you can show self defense by presenting some evidence that: (1) force was threatened against you, (2) you were not the aggressor, (3) the danger of harm was imminent, (4) the threatened force was unlawful, (5) you actually and subjectively believed the danger required using the force applied, and (6) your beliefs were objectively reasonable. 

Self-defense is not available if you initially provoked the force used against you, unless:

*Such force is so great that you reasonably believed you were in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and

*You exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger other than by using force that is likely to cause death or great bodily harm.

For example, in People v. Williams,  a group tried to rob Beam, a passenger on the CTA red line, but Beam stabbed one of the robbers.  The group then came across defendant in another car and told him someone had been stabbed.  Defendant decided to stop Beam.  After a chase, Beam lunged at defendant with a knife, and defendant hit Beam with a bottle.

The court found that defendant failed to prove self defense. When defendant struck Beam, Beam was rushing him with a knife. Thus, force was clearly threatened, and the danger was imminent. From defendant’s view, Beam’s force would have appeared unlawful, as defendant was unaware that Beam had recently been attacked. And, defendant actually and subjectively believed that Beam was going to stab him. That belief was objectively reasonable, given that Beam was about to do so.  The problem was that defendant involved himself in the ongoing fight, despite having no connection with it other than being a fellow passenger. Therefore, defendant failed to prove he was not the aggressor. Defendant sought out Beam, then blocked his exit from the train. Defendant could easily have avoided the danger, the court said, by merely stepping aside.

As the example shows, a judge or jury looks at all the facts to decide if self defense applies.  A slight change in the above facts—defendant steps aside—could mean the difference between conviction and acquittal.  As different judges may view the same facts differently, you should consult an experienced criminal law attorney familiar with your courthouse who can present your facts to your judge in their most favorable light.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

The answer is yes, as long as the officer has probable cause.

According to the Illinois Supreme Court, where police already have the right to make a warrantless arrest for a felony, there is no apparent reason why an investigative alert gives them police any special advantage. Whether the arrest is lawful depends on the information available to the police collectively. If the person issuing the radio bulletin or authorizing the wanted poster had probable cause to do so, the facts need not be present in the mind of the officer making the arrest.

If you are arrested on the basis of an alert, is there anything you can do?  Contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for your best possible options.  The arrest must still be based on probable cause.  If not, an attorney can bring a motion before the judge to suppress any evidence from an illegal arrest.

Even if the arrest is legal, the state must still prove you guilty of all the elements of your offense beyond a reasonable doubt.  An attorney can look for holes in the state’s evidence.  But even if the evidence is overwhelming, an attorney, who is respected in the court house, may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

Reference: People v. Clark

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)

Resisting a peace officer is a crime if you knew that: (1) the person was a peace officer, and (2) your actions would obstruct or resist that officer’s authorized act. (See 720 ILCS 5/31-1).

To prove your knowledge, the state may use circumstantial evidence inferred from your actions and the conduct surrounding them. The intent to arrest must be communicated, and your understanding of that intent may be considered. However, the test is not what you in particular thought, but what a reasonable, innocent person would have thought in your shoes. It is not necessary for the officer to explicitly tell you that you are under arrest in order to support the conclusion that you knew the officer was arresting you.

Your resistance must materially impede an officer’s performance of an authorized act. The length of any delay that you cause is one factor in determining whether your resistance was a material impediment. Your conduct may be a material impediment even from a brief delay, if it threatens the officer’s safety.

Note that you may not use force to resist even if the arrest is unlawful. An unlawful arrest is still considered an authorized act under the law.

If you are charged with resisting a peace officer, contact an experienced criminal law attorney immediately. An attorney can review your case for your best possible defense. Did you know you were dealing with a peace officer? Did he or she identify themselves in some way? Was the officer acting in their official capacity or did they simply happen to be there? Were your actions a material impediment? Was the officer performing an “authorized” act?

Even if the evidence is overwhelming and police acted lawfully, an attorney who is respected in the courthouse may be able to negotiate a more favorable plea agreement than you could on your own.

If you have questions about this or another related Illinois criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

Reference: People v. Walston,

No matter how great they are, not all attorneys are right for all clients. So how do you choose thebest criminal defense attorney for you? Here are some pointers:

1) Communication: This factor would likely be at the top of any client’s list. You need an attorney who will communicate well with you. This does not necessarily mean that your calls are immediately returned every time. But the attorney should answer your questions and explain your options in a way that you understand.

2) Trust: Choosing an attorney can be like choosing a doctor. You need to have confidence in their judgment. If you find yourself constantly second-guessing your attorney, then you may need to find someone else. You should not, however, assume that how you think a case should be handled would actually work in the courtroom. An experienced attorney knows how the justice system really works, which is why you need someone you trust to guide you through it.

By the same token, beware an attorney who promises you the moon. The legal business just doesn’t work that way. You need an attorney to give realistic advice about your situation.

3) Personality: While not necessarily important, finding a good fit for your personality can increase your peace of mind. Perhaps you’ve never gotten in trouble before, and you are terrified. A compassionate attorney with a warm and caring manner might work better for you than the more coldly, clinical type. If you are all business yourself, you might prefer a more detached lawyer.

4) Knowledge and Experience: Has the attorney worked on this type of case before? Does your attorney ask the right questions? Are they knowledgeable about the law and procedure? How about the players in the courthouse? An attorney’s main job is to formulate the best strategy to defend your case. A knowledge of what the prosecutor is likely to offer or how the judge is likely to react can be invaluable when making important decisions such as whether to take a case to a jury.

5) Reputation: An attorney who enjoys a good reputation at the courthouse is more effective. An attorney who is respected and/or liked may get a better deal than one who is rude and does sloppy work.

6) Price: This is the least important factor except in terms of your budget. If the attorney is econo-priced, are they still willing to give your case the time and attention it deserves? Do they ever take cases to trial or is their legal representation one size fits all? Many times, I have had a difficult second offense with a client because they hired a cheap attorney to plea out a fightable first offense. Even where a plea agreement is best, attorneys who automatically plea out cases may not get you the best possible deal. A prosecutor has no incentive to give a good deal to an attorney who won’t fight for you anyway.

By the same token, an attorney who charges top dollar is not a guarantee of quality. You really need to evaluate each attorney based on the above factors.

If you have questions about this or another related criminal or traffic matter, please contact Matt Keenan at 847-568-0160 or email matt@mattkeenanlaw.com.

(Besides Skokie, Matt Keenan also serves the communities of Arlington Heights, Chicago, Deerfield, Des Plaines, Evanston, Glenview, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Niles, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Rolling Meadows, Wilmette and Winnetka.)