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

NUMBER 10 OF BILL WOLF’S “TOP TEN” FOURTH AMENDMENT CASES FOR ILLINOIS LAWYERS: THE ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT CASE OF PEOPLE V. MCCAVITT.

On Behalf of Wolf Criminal Law | Apr 26, 2022 | Firm News

The defendant was the target of a criminal sexual assault investigation. Pursuant to the investigation, arrest, and prosecution, a computer was seized and a search for images was made to look for images to implicate the Defendant in the sexual assault.

Roughly eight months later, the Defendant went to trial and was found “not guilty.” Two days later, another police agency, knowing of the acquittal, requested the EnCase data still in law enforcement’s possession to now look at more data for child pornography. This data was obtained without an additional warrant.

The trial court denied a motion to suppress and the appellate court reversed. The appellate court held that once the Defendant was acquitted, he no longer had a diminished expectation of privacy in his property and that it was unreasonable for an officer to look at the data without a warrant.

The case is People v. McCavitt, 2019 IL App. (3rd) 170830. Decided 11/26/2019

https://courts.illinois.gov/Opinions/AppellateCourt/2019/3rdDistrict/3170830.pdf

Recent Posts

  • 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
  • What does “reasonable force” mean in self-defense cases in bars and music venues?

Archives

  • 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