Wolf Criminal Law
  • Home
  • About
    • Bill Wolf
    • Jack DeBacker
  • Practice Areas
    • Criminal Defense
    • Appeals
    • Assault Charges
    • Asset Forfeiture
    • Carjackings
    • Drug Crimes
    • Federal Crimes
    • Grand Jury Investigations
    • Gun Crimes
    • Homicide
    • RICO Charges
    • Sex Crimes
    • Theft, Robbery And Burglary
    • Vehicular Homicide
    • White Collar Crimes
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Areas We Serve
    • Champaign County
    • Peoria County
    • Winnebago County

Call or text us for a free consultation: 312-444-0907

Wolf Criminal Law
  • Home
  • About
    • Bill Wolf
    • Jack DeBacker
  • Practice Areas
    • Criminal Defense
    • Appeals
    • Assault Charges
    • Asset Forfeiture
    • Carjackings
    • Drug Crimes
    • Federal Crimes
    • Grand Jury Investigations
    • Gun Crimes
    • Homicide
    • RICO Charges
    • Sex Crimes
    • Theft, Robbery And Burglary
    • Vehicular Homicide
    • White Collar Crimes
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Areas We Serve
    • Champaign County
    • Peoria County
    • Winnebago County
Email

CALL

Attorney Bill Wolf

We Represent Clients In Chicago And Statewide, Including Cook, Will, Kane And DuPage Counties

  1. Home
  2.  – 
  3. Firm News
  4.  – 
  5. NUMBER 5 OF BILL WOLF’S “TOP TEN” FOURTH AMENDMENT CASES FOR ILLINOIS LAWYERS: THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT CASE OF PEOPLE V. BASS

NUMBER 5 OF BILL WOLF’S “TOP TEN” FOURTH AMENDMENT CASES FOR ILLINOIS LAWYERS: THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT CASE OF PEOPLE V. BASS

On Behalf of Wolf Criminal Law | Dec 31, 2019 | Firm News

A Chicago Police Officer put an “investigative alert” out for the Defendant, claiming that there was, in the opinion of someone in the Chicago Police Department, probable cause to believe that the Defendant has committed a crime without going to a neutral, detached magistrate to get an arrest warrant.

The Defendant was arrested and brought to the station to be questioned in a sex abuse investigation. He then gave inculpatory statements. The trial court denied the Defendant’s Motion to Quash Arrest and Suppress his statements.

The appellate court held that an investigative alert may be in compliance with the Fourth Amendment’s requirements of “oaths and affirmations,” but it is not in compliance with Article One, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of Illinois requirements of “affidavits.”

This is an important case not just because of the holding with respect to these alerts, but because the case gives more force to the idea that the Illinois Constitution is not in complete lockstep with the United States Constitution, and in fact offers more protections than the U.S. Constitution.

The case is People v. Bass, 2019 IL App. (1st) 160640. Decided 7/25/2019, Modified on denial of rehearing 9/30/2019.

Recent Posts

  • How a “gang member” label can block diversion in Cook County
  • 4 mistakes to avoid when pursuing a criminal appeal
  • How defense attorneys work to suppress confessions before a trial
  • Why a broken chain of custody can get a case dismissed
  • 2 common consequences tied to RICO charges in Illinois

Archives

  • August 2026
  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • August 2023
  • April 2022
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • December 2019
  • August 2019

Categories

  • Asset Forfeiture
  • Criminal Defense
  • Firm News

RSS Feed

Subscribe To This Blog’s Feed

Contact Us For A Free Consultation

Wolf Criminal Law


Address

35 E. Wacker Drive
Suite 1980
Chicago, IL 60601

Chicago Law Office



Contact

Phone: 312-444-0907

Review The Firm
  • Follow
  • Follow

© 2026 Wolf Criminal Law • All Rights Reserved

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw

  • Follow
  • Follow