People v. Peppers
Case Date: 09/30/2004
Court: 1st District Appellate
Docket No: 1-03-2543 Rel
|
SECOND DIVISION No. 1-03-2543
JUSTICE WOLFSON delivered the opinion of the court:
This garden variety drug case raises a Fourth Amendmentquestion that has commanded the attention of federal and statecourts across the nation. The same answer keeps coming up--thegovernment can require a convicted felon to undergo a blood orsaliva test for submission to state and national DNA databankswithout individualized suspicion that the felon has committedsome other crime. That is our answer in this case. Following a bench trial, defendant Willie Peppers wasconvicted of possession of a stolen motor vehicle and possessionof a controlled substance. The trial court sentenced defendantto five years' imprisonment for possession of a stolen vehicleand a concurrent two-year term for possession of a controlledsubstance. We affirm. FACTS At trial, Officer Jesse Farmer testified that at 11:30 p.m.on September 19, 2002, he and his partner responded to a call at534 West Division Street in Chicago. As they were leaving, theyobserved a car entering the parking lot without its headlightslit. Officer Farmer checked the license plates of the car andlearned it was stolen. When the officers approached the car,Farmer noticed defendant was the driver. He arrested defendantand performed a custodial search. Farmer found a clear plasticbag in defendant's front pocket containing 24 foil packets ofwhite powder suspected to be heroin. Defendant told police hewas renting the car from someone. Later, defendant said hebelieved "it was probably stolen." Officer Farmer testified he maintained custody of thesuspected narcotics until he inventoried them under number10031590. The parties stipulated to the following: " *** the 24 packets recovered from thedefendant and inventoried under Inventory No.10031590, that the chain of custody on thatitem was preserved at all times and it wasproperly sealed and inventoried; that it wassent to the Illinois State Police Crime Labwhere it was received by Arthur Wethers. It would be stipulated that Mr. Wethersif called to testify would be qualified bythis Court as an expert in the forensicscience of testing for the presence ofcontrolled substances. Mr. Wethers wouldtell your Honor that he received thatinventoried item in a sealed condition; andthat he opened it and found it to be 24packets, that he opened and weighed andtested these packets; and that his conclusionwas that the powdery substance was 1.06 gramsof heroin." When the trial judge asked, "That is within a reasonabledegree of scientific certainty?", the parties stipulated it was. After the stipulation was entered, both parties rested. The trial court convicted defendant on both counts,sentencing him to five years' imprisonment on possession of astolen motor vehicle and a concurrent two-year term forpossession of a controlled substance. Defendant contends: (1) the trial court's order, pursuant tosection 5-4-3 of the Unified Code of Corrections, compellingdefendant to provide a blood sample for DNA identificationdatabases, violated defendant's Fourth Amendment rights; (2) theState failed to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubtbecause the State failed to offer a proper foundation for thestipulated expert opinion that the seized items were heroin; and(3) the trial court erroneously determined defendant wasineligible for TASC (Treatment Alternatives for Safe Communities)probation based on his prior felony convictions. DECISION I. Constitutionality of Section 5-4-3 of the Unified Code of Corrections In the last fifteen years, state governments began to enactDNA collection statutes. All fifty states and the federalgovernment (see 42 U.S.C. |
||||