Find Court Cases > Go Back to List > People v. Blankenship

People v. Blankenship

Case Date: 11/15/2004
Court: 3rd District Appellate
Docket No: 3-02-0937 Rel

No. 3-02-0937

IN THE

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

THIRD DISTRICT

A.D., 2004

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
ILLINOIS,

          Plaintiff-Appellee,

          v.

LEE E. BLANKENSHIP,

          Defendant-Appellant.

 )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)		 Appeal from the Circuit Court
of the 12th Judicial Circuit
Will County, Illinois


No. 02-CF-525

Honorable
Rozak, Daniel,
Judge, Presiding

JUSTICE LYTTON delivered the opinion of the Court:
 

Defendant, Lee Blankenship, was charged by indictment withaggravated unlawful use of a weapon, in violation of section 5/24-1.6(a)(3)(C) of the Criminal Code. 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(3)(C) (West2002). Defendant's pretrial motions to quash the arrest, suppressevidence, and exclude evidence of prior convictions were denied. Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted. Defendant appealsthe denial of his pretrial motions, and we affirm.

FACTS

On March 27, 2002, Officer Terry Higgins of the Joliet PoliceDepartment was stopped at a red light behind a green Ford Escort. Though he had not observed any traffic violation, Higgins enteredthe Escort's license plate number into the computer in his car. The computer check revealed that the car was registered to SharmelBlankenship, defendant's wife. A vehicle note, or v-note, whichhad been entered by another Joliet police officer on February 27,2002, also appeared on the computer. The v-note indicated thatdefendant frequently drove the Escort, gave a description ofdefendant, and indicated that as of February 27, 2002, defendant'slicense was suspended. Higgins observed that the driver of the carmatched the description of defendant in the v-note and pulled theEscort over. Defendant was driving the car and was arrested fordriving with a suspended license. Police officers searched the carand found a handgun in the glove compartment.

Defendant was charged with aggravated unlawful use of aweapon. He filed a motion to quash his arrest and suppress allevidence, including the gun. In support of the motion, defendantargued that Higgins could not reasonably identify the driver of thecar prior to the traffic stop and, therefore, had no reasonablearticulable suspicion that defendant was driving the car. Thetrial court denied the motion.

Defendant also moved to prevent the State from introducingfour prior convictions to impeach defendant if he testified. Thetrial judge granted the motion on two of the convictions, butdenied the motion as to the other two, which were both for unlawfuluse of a weapon by a felon. When defendant testified at trial, theState introduced both prior convictions to impeach defendant.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of aggravatedunlawful use of a weapon and sentenced to 22 years imprisonment.

ANALYSIS

Defendant first argues that the computer check of his licenseplate was an improper search, violating the federal and IllinoisConstitutions. U.S. Const., amend. IV; Ill. Const. 1970, art. I,