People v. Hayes, 5–14–0223

• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois
• Writing for the Court: JUSTICE CHAPMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.
• Citation: 2018 IL App (5th) 140223,428 Ill.Dec. 5,121 N.E.3d 103
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Chad B. HAYES, Defendant–Appellant.
• Docket Number: NO. 5–14–0223,5–14–0223
• Decision Date: 15 February 2018

2018 IL App (5th) 140223
121 N.E.3d 103
428 Ill.Dec. 5

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff–Appellee,
v.
Chad B. HAYES, Defendant–Appellant.

NO. 5–14–0223

Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District.

Opinion Filed: February 15, 2018

Attorneys for Appellant, Michael J. Pelletier, State Appellate Defender, Ellen J. Curry, Deputy Defender, Jennifer M. Lassy, Assistant Appellate Defender, Office of the State Appellate Defender, Fifth Judicial District, 909 Water Tower Circle, Mt. Vernon, IL 62864

Attorneys for Appellee, Hon. Michael L. Strange, State's Attorney, Lawrence County Courthouse, Lawrenceville, IL 62439; Patrick Delfino, Director, David J. Robinson, Deputy Director, David Mannchen, Staff Attorney, Office of the State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor, 725 South Second Street, Springfield IL 62704

JUSTICE CHAPMAN delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion.

428 Ill.Dec. 8

121 N.E.3d 106

¶ 1 The event underlying this appeal is the tragic death of a seven-year-old boy. The defendant, Chad B. Hayes, struck the boy with his vehicle when the boy rode his bicycle in front of the defendant's vehicle. An officer investigating the accident requested that another officer drive the defendant to the hospital to provide blood and urine samples for drug testing. The test indicated the presence of drugs, and the defendant was charged with aggravated driving under the influence (DUI) ( 625 ILCS 5/11–501(d)(1)(F) (West 2010) ). The defendant appeals his conviction on this charge, arguing that (1) he did not actually consent to the tests, (2) he did not impliedly consent to the tests under section 11–501.6(a) of the Illinois Vehicle Code (id. § 11–501.6(a) ), (3) the test was not supported by probable cause or any exigent circumstances that would justify failure to seek a warrant, (4) he was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and (5) he did not knowingly waive his right to a jury trial. We reverse.

¶ 2 On July 25, 2011, the defendant was driving home from the store with two of his children. According to the defendant's statement to police, one of the children attempted to hand the defendant a piece of candy to unwrap for him. The defendant looked back to talk to the child. As he did, his vehicle struck seven-year-old David Kirby. The defendant did not see David beforehand. According to a statement given to police by Pamela Clem, who witnessed the accident, David rode his bicycle between two parked cars onto the roadway and into the path of the defendant's van. Clem did not believe that the defendant could have done anything to avoid the accident.

¶ 3 The accident took place near city hall in Sumner, Illinois. The defendant ran into city hall asking for help. Brent Parrott, a volunteer firefighter who was there that day, administered CPR to David. Several police officers responded to the accident, including Lawrence County Deputy Danny Ash, Illinois State Police Trooper Brooks Thomann, and Bridgeport Police Chief Scott Murray. Deputy Ash asked Chief Murray to transport the defendant to Lawrence County Memorial Hospital to provide blood and urine samples for drug screening. Chief Murray drove the defendant to the hospital. Deputy Ash arrived after the samples were taken and drove the defendant back to the police station. The results of initial tests performed by the hospital's lab were faxed to Deputy Ash later that afternoon. The tests revealed the presence of THC and amphetamine. After receiving these results, Deputy Ash placed the defendant under arrest for DUI.

¶ 4 The following day, July 26, 2011, Deputy Ash completed a police report. In it, he noted that testing of the samples by the hospital's lab indicated the presence of THC and amphetamine in the defendant's

121 N.E.3d 107

428 Ill.Dec. 9

system, and he stated that "Chad Hayes was soon after placed under arrest." In addition, Deputy Ash indicated that the defendant could be charged with endangering the health or life of a child ( 720 ILCS 5/12–21.6(a) (West 2010) ), aggravated DUI ( 625 ILCS 5/11–501(d)(1)(F) (West 2010) ), failure to exercise due care (id. § 11–1003.1), and failure to reduce speed to avoid an accident (id. § 11–601(a) ).

¶ 5 At some point between July 25 and July 27, an assistant state's attorney discussed the matter with Deputy Ash. She told him that she was concerned about the fact that Chief Murray did not read the defendant the warning to motorists before the blood and urine samples were taken. See id. § 11–501.6(c). She also expressed concern about the fact that no traffic citation had been issued to the defendant. Due to these concerns, Deputy Ash asked the defendant to submit to a second drug test on July 27. The samples drawn on both dates were submitted to the Illinois State Police crime lab in Springfield. Testing of the blood drawn on July 25 indicated the presence of less than 50 ug/L of methamphetamine. The blood sample tested negative for any other substances. Testing of the urine sample collected on that date, however, indicated the presence of methamphetamine, amphetamine, THC, and naproxen. Both the blood and urine samples collected on July 27 tested negative for the presence of any drugs.

¶ 6 Deputy Ash also issued two traffic citations to the defendant for failing to exercise due care (id. § 11–1003.1) and failing to reduce speed to avoid an accident (id. § 11–601(a) ). Both citations were dated July 27, 2011. On July 28, the defendant was charged with aggravated DUI (id. § 11–501(d)(1)(F) ).

¶ 7 On July 23, 2012, the defendant filed a motion in limine seeking to exclude the results of the July 25, 2011, blood and urine tests. He filed amended motions on September 7 and September 11, 2012. He argued that (1) Deputy Ash lacked probable cause to require the defendant to submit to drug testing and (2) statutory requirements for the admission of test results were not satisfied. The matter came for a hearing on October 31, 2012.

¶ 8 The first witness to testify was Trooper Brooks Thomann of the Illinois State Police. He explained that the state police were asked to assist in the investigation because they have more experience and expertise than local police departments in handling crash investigations. Trooper Thomann noted that he is not an accident reconstruction specialist, and his involvement in the investigation was limited. He testified that upon arriving at the scene, he spoke with Deputy Ash, who advised him of the statement given to him by Pamela Clem describing the accident. Trooper Thomann took measurements at the scene of the accident, and determined that the defendant's vehicle dragged David Kirby on his bicycle 47 feet before coming to a stop. Trooper Thomann testified that he then proceeded to interview the defendant. The defendant told Trooper Thomann the same thing he told Deputy Ash. Trooper Thomann asked the defendant what speed he was driving, and the defendant indicated that he did not know. Trooper Thomann saw no indication that the defendant was speeding.

¶ 9 Trooper Thomann testified that he had both training and experience in recognizing the signs of intoxication or influence of drugs in motorists. He did not notice anything about the defendant's demeanor or appearance that would lead him to believe that the defendant was intoxicated or under the influence. He did not detect the odor of alcohol or drugs, and he noted that the defendant did not slur his speech.

121 N.E.3d 108

428 Ill.Dec. 10

Asked what his conclusion was as to the cause of the accident, Trooper Thomann replied, "as far as I could see, the child had just ridden out into the street. And when he came around that vehicle, shot out in the middle of the street, and then Mr. Hayes struck him." Trooper Thomann testified that he did not issue any traffic citation to the defendant, explaining, "There was no violation, as far as Mr. Hayes."

¶ 10 The next witness to testify was Chief Scott Murray. Chief Murray did not actively participate in the investigation. He explained that because Sumner and Bridgeport have small police departments, the officers from the two departments help each other as needed. Chief Murray indicated that he was the first officer to arrive at the scene. He directed traffic around the accident scene while Brent Parrott and the medics were attempting to administer CPR to the young child that was struck.

¶ 11 Chief Murray testified that Deputy Ash asked him to transport the defendant to Lawrence County Memorial Hospital for drug testing. Chief Murray did so. He testified that he did not know whether Deputy Ash had placed the defendant under arrest prior to this time. He further testified that during the 10–minute ride to the hospital, the defendant was not handcuffed. At the hospital, Chief Murray accompanied the defendant to the restroom while he provided a urine sample and remained with him while his blood was drawn. Chief Murray testified that he waited with the defendant until Deputy Ash arrived to transport him from the hospital. Chief Murray handed Deputy Ash the DUI kit completed by hospital staff and then left. He assumed that Deputy Ash transported the defendant back to the police...