People v. $1,124,905 U.S. Currency and One 1988 Chevrolet Astro Van

Decision Date18 September 1997
Docket NumberNo. 79106,79106
Parties, 226 Ill.Dec. 627 The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Appellee, v. $1,124,905 U.S. CURRENCY AND ONE 1988 CHEVROLET ASTRO VAN (Jesus Mena, Appellant).
CourtIllinois Supreme Court

Jim Ryan, Attorney General, Criminal Appeals Div., Chicago, State's Attorneys App. Pros. of Springfield, Springfield, State's Attorney of McLean County, Bloomington, Charles F. Mansfield, Staff Atty., State's Atty. Appellate Prosecutor, Springfield, for the People of the State of Illinois.

Justice NICKELS delivered the opinion of the court:

In this appeal, we examine the forfeiture of $1,124,905 police discovered in a van Jesus Mena was driving. The State initiated civil forfeiture proceedings in the circuit court of McLean County by filing a complaint against the currency and the van pursuant to the Drug Asset Forfeiture Procedure Act (725 ILCS 150/1 et seq. (West 1994)). In response, Jesus filed a claim and verified answer and subsequently an amended answer, contesting only the forfeiture of the currency. In his answers, Jesus declined to respond to certain interrogatories required by the Act (725 ILCS 150/9(D) (West 1994)), asserting his fifth amendment privilege. On the State's motion, the circuit court struck Jesus' answers, finding that Jesus lacked standing to contest the forfeiture. Jesus declined to replead and the circuit court entered an order of default and an order of forfeiture. The appellate court declined to determine whether Jesus possessed standing, and instead found it dispositive that the State had established probable cause to forfeit the property. 269 Ill.App.3d 952, 207 Ill.Dec. 535, 647 N.E.2d 1028. We granted Jesus' petition for leave to appeal. 155 Ill.2d R. 315.

BACKGROUND

On July 9, 1993, the Illinois State Police seized a van containing $1,124,905. Pursuant to the Drug Asset Forfeiture Procedure Act (725 ILCS 150/5 (West 1994)), the police notified the State's Attorney for McLean County of the seizure of the property. On August 19, 1993, the drug enforcement prosecutor for the McLean County State's Attorney's office filed a complaint for forfeiture in the circuit court. The complaint set forth the following allegations:

"1. That on July 9, 1993, a trooper of the Illinois State Police stopped to assist motorists standing outside an apparently stranded 1988 Chevrolet Astro Van, VIN 1GNCM15Z1JB169536, Illinois registration tag SVG543;

2. That said stop occurred on Interstate 55 southbound at or near milepost 185 in McLean County, Illinois;

3. That Jesus Mena, Elena B. Mena and a one year old child were the motorists found outside the vehicle 4. That following said stop, the trooper and a back-up learned that the automobile [was] registered to Melvin J. DeJesus;

5. That following said stop, the troopers conducted a lawful search of the vehicle;

6. That during the course of said search the troopers found compartments built into the floor of the vehicle;

7. That the troopers found the sum of $1,124,905.00 U.S. Currency in the compartment of the vehicle.

8. That the U.S. Currency was furnished or intended to be furnished in exchange for a substance, or the proceeds thereof, in violation of the Controlled Substances Act;

9. That the troopers seized the above-captioned property which is subject to forfeiture based upon the statutory provisions of 720 ILCS 570/505 (1993) as amended."

After filing the complaint for forfeiture, the State sent a copy of the complaint as notice of the forfeiture to Jesus and Elena Mena, and to Melvin DeJesus. The State also provided notice to other interested parties by publication. In the affidavit for publication, the State's Attorney stated that "I believe Jesus and Elena Mena and Melvin DeJesus to be the owner(s) of the property" and that "there may be other owners or interested parties who, after due and diligent inquiry, I have been unable to ascertain addresses for." All the notices further provided that an answer contesting the forfeiture must be filed within 45 days at the risk of default.

Only Jesus Mena filed a claim and answer contesting the forfeiture. In his answer, Jesus Mena contested forfeiture of the currency only.

The State moved to strike the answer on grounds that the answer did not comply with the requirements of the Drug Asset Forfeiture Procedure Act (725 ILCS 150/1 et seq. (West 1994)). Specifically, the motion challenged Jesus' answer on grounds that the answer did not specify the extent of his interest in the property as required by section 9(D)(iii) of the Act (725 ILCS 150/9(D)(iii) (West 1994)); that the answer did not set forth the date, identity of transferor and circumstances of his acquisition of the property as required by section 9(D)(iv) (725 ILCS 150/9(D)(iv) (West 1994)); that the answer did not identify any defenses contained in section 8 of the Act that Jesus intended to rely on as required by section 9(D)(vi) (725 ILCS 150/9(D)(vi) (West 1994)); and that the answer did not include all essential facts supporting each allegation as required by section 9(D)(vii) (725 ILCS 150/9(D)(vii) (West 1994)). The State's motion to strike was granted and Jesus was granted leave to file an amended answer satisfying the statutory requirements.

In the time allowed for filing the amended answer, Jesus instead filed a motion to strike the State's complaint and a motion to make the complaint more definite and certain. The thrust of both motions was an attack on the factual sufficiency of the allegations in the complaint for forfeiture. Jesus challenged the allegations contained in paragraphs five and eight in the complaint, requesting facts to support the allegations that the search was lawful and that the currency was furnished or intended to be furnished for a controlled substance.

The trial court denied Jesus' motion to strike the complaint. The trial court granted in part Jesus' motion to make the complaint more definite by requiring the State to amend its allegation concerning the lawfulness of the search to include the fact that the search was pursuant to the consent of Jesus. The trial court found no problem with the allegation in paragraph eight and therefore accepted the State's amended complaint.

Jesus subsequently filed a timely amended claim and answer. In his amended answer, Jesus claimed exclusive ownership of the currency. Jesus refused, however, to allege the date and circumstances of his acquisition of this ownership interest, asserting his fifth amendment privilege. The trial court granted the State's subsequent motion to strike the amended answer, finding that the allegations in the answer did not satisfy the requirements of the statute necessary to show standing.

Jesus elected to stand on his answer. The State then filed a motion seeking an order of default and forfeiture. Neither Jesus nor his attorney appeared at the hearing on the motion.

[226 Ill.Dec. 631] In support of the motion, the State for the first time submitted the affidavit of Illinois State Police Sergeant Mike Snyders. In his affidavit, Sergeant Snyders recounted the circumstances surrounding his seizure of the van and currency.

In his affidavit, Sergeant Snyders states that he is the coordinator of the Illinois State Police Highway Interdiction Program and that he has extensive training and experience in drug interdiction. On July 9, 1993, he observed a van with its hood open on the side of the highway and stopped to assist. At the van, he found a man and woman, later identified as Jesus and Elena Mena, and a small child. Jesus indicated that the van had overheated.

Sergeant Snyders then asked Jesus if the van belonged to him. Jesus responded that the van belonged to a friend, but he did not know the friend's name or how to get in touch with him. Jesus presented Sergeant Snyders with the van's title, which listed the owner as Melvin J. DeJesus. Jesus could not give the owner's address or phone number or explain how he was supposed to return the van. Sergeant Snyders' affidavit further states that Jesus and Elena gave conflicting stories regarding their destination. Jesus reported that they were heading to St. Louis to look for work. Elena reported they were heading to Texas. Sergeant Snyders characterized Jesus and Elena as appearing nervous and scared.

According to the affidavit, Sergeant Snyders told Jesus that he was very suspicious about the story. Sergeant Snyders then asked Jesus if he had any large amounts of cash in the van. Jesus laughed and said that he did not have any large amounts of cash and he was not transporting anything for anyone else. Jesus then gave consent for Sergeant Snyders and a backup officer to search the van.

During the search of the van, Sergeant Snyders observed evidence that the van had been altered to create a compartment in the floor. Sergeant Snyders noticed that the spare tire had been removed from the outside of the van and the undercarriage had been sprayed with a black, oily substance. Sergeant Snyders also noticed that inside the van the floor was flat, but the exterior showed a tapered shape. In addition, the center bench showed evidence it had been removed, including fasteners that did not match and carpeting that did not fit properly.

Sergeant Snyders then pulled back the carpeting and discovered a layer of plywood and a thin metal floor with a trap door. Sergeant Snyders discovered, inside the trap door, a compartment full of cash bundles. There were 112 cellophane and duct tape bundles with the number 10 written on them and one bundle with the number five written on it. A later count revealed a total of $1,124,905.

Sergeant Snyders' affidavit further provides that Jesus, Elena and the child were transported from the scene to the police station. During an interview at the station, Jesus admitted that DeJesus had hired him to transport...

To continue reading

Request your trial
79 cases
  • Petri v. Gatlin
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • 30 Diciembre 1997
    ...has long been a "fact pleading" (rather than "notice pleading") state. See People v. $1,124,905 U.S. Currency and One 1988 Chevrolet Astro Van, 177 Ill.2d 314, 226 Ill.Dec. 627, 685 N.E.2d 1370, 1380 (1997) (slip copy); Anderson v. Vanden Dorpel, 172 Ill.2d 399, 217 Ill.Dec. 720, 667 N.E.2d......
  • People v. One 1998 GMC
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 30 Diciembre 2011
    ...unlawful search and seizure of property * * * may move for the property's return.”); see also People v. $1,124,905 U.S. Currency, 177 Ill.2d 314, 340, 341, 226 Ill.Dec. 627, 685 N.E.2d 1370 (1997) (a claimant's section 2–615 motion to dismiss challenging the legal sufficiency of the State's......
  • Piccioli v. Bd. of Trs. of the Teachers' Ret. Sys.
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 4 Abril 2019
    ...that courts decide actual controversies and not abstract questions. People v. $1,124,905 U.S. Currency & One 1988 Chevrolet Astro Van , 177 Ill. 2d 314, 328, 226 Ill.Dec. 627, 685 N.E.2d 1370 (1997) (citing In re Marriage of Rodriguez , 131 Ill. 2d 273, 279-80, 137 Ill.Dec. 78, 545 N.E.2d 7......
  • Doe v. Dilling
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • 22 Diciembre 2006
    ...grounds cannot be permitted to stand"); accord People v. $1,124,905 U.S. Currency & One 1988 Chevrolet Astro Van, 177 Ill.2d 314, 345, 226 Ill.Dec. 627, 685 N.E.2d 1370 (1997) (Heiple, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part) ("We instruct our juries that their verdicts must be based ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Illinois Pretrial Practice. Volume 2 - 2014 Contents
    • 12 Agosto 2014
    ...Gas Light & Coke Co. v. Austin, 147 Ill App3d 26, 497 NE2d 790 (1st Dist. 1986), §§8:431, 9:52 People v. $1,124,905 U.S. Currency , 177 Ill2d 314, 685 NE2d 1370, 226 Ill Dec 627 (1997), §§13:33, 31:15 People v. Boclair , 119 Ill2d 368, 519 NE2d 437, 116 Ill Dec 545 (1987), §21:180 People v.......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • 1 Mayo 2013
    ...1235 (3d Dist 2008), §1:300 People ex rel JIB v. Hartel , 72 Ill 2d 225, 380 NE2d 801 (1978), §8:40 People v. $1,124,905 US Currency , 177 Ill 2d 314, 685 NE2d 1370 (1997), §§7:60, 21:80 People v. $5,608 United States Currency , 359 Ill App 3d 891, 835 NE2d 920 91st Dist 2005), §8:140 Peopl......
  • Default Judgment and Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Illinois Pretrial Practice. Volume 2 - 2014 Contents
    • 12 Agosto 2014
    ...admit the conclusions of the pleader. [See People of the State of Illinois v. $1,124,905 U.S. Currency and One 1988 Chevrolet Astro Van , 177 Ill 2d 314 (1997).] §31:16 Defendant Must File a Formal Response A default judgment can be entered if the defendant fails to plead in response to the......
  • Privileges
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • 1 Mayo 2013
    ...to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them. People v. $1,124,905 US Currency and One 1988 Chevrolet Astro Van , 177 Ill 2d 314, 685 NE 2d 1370 (1997). Other Illinois appellate courts have ruled similarly. See People v. Houar , 365 Ill App 3d 682 (2006) (negative infer......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT