People v. Bunch, 207 Ill.2d 7, 796 N.E.2d 1024, 277 Ill. Dec. 658 (2003).

Procedural History
The defendant, Bernard Bunch, was charged with possession of a controlled
substance, and was denied a motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence. The
defendant was sentenced to four years of imprisonment. Defendant appealed. Appellate
court reversed. The state petitioned for leave to appeal.

Statement of Facts
On February 1, 2002, at 1:10 a.m., Officer Lukensmeyer saw a car slow down and
come to a stop, but did not see the brake lights illuminate. He pulled over the 1990
Pontiac and approached the car on the drivers side. The officer asked the driver to see a
drivers license. When the driver could not produce a license, he was arrested,
handcuffed, and walked to the rear of the car.

The officer then approached the defendant in the front passenger seat, and
requested him to exit the car and go to the rear of the vehicle, where the driver was
standing handcuffed. The officer asked the defendant questions, including his name and
where he was coming from because he was curious to know whom the defendant was.
While the officer questioned the defendant, he was shining a flashlight into the
defendants face. It was then that the officer saw a small, clear plastic item containing
something white, in the defendants mouth. The officer ordered the defendant to spit out
the item in his mouth, and then arrested the defendant.

Issue
Did the officer violate the defendants Fourth Amendment rights by questioning
and detaining him past the completion of a traffic stop?

Brief Answer/Holding
Yes. The defendants Fourth Amendment rights were violated. Questioning of
the defendant had nothing to do with the reason for the traffic stop, and was not backed

Page 1
up by reasonable and articulable suspicion that the defendant was, about to be, or had
been part of any illegal activity.

Reasoning
During a traffic stop, temporary detainment of a vehicles driver and passengers
are subject to the Fourth Amendment s condition of reasonableness. The Terry
principles stem from Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), and offer a way to challenge what
is reasonable during a traffic stop. (1) If questioning is related to the reason for the traffic
stop, then it is permitted, and (2) if the questioning is not connected to the purpose of the
traffic stop, then reasonable and articulable suspicion needs to substantiate it.

In the case at hand, the vehicle was pulled over based on the officers surveillance
of the brake lights not illuminating when the vehicle came to a stopa traffic violation.
The defendant was an idle front-seat passenger with no connection to the reason for the
stop, and who had not given the police officer any reason to believe he was involved in
any kind of threatening or criminal conduct.

The traffic stop ended when the officer arrested the driver for not producing a
license. Based on the Terry principles, the officer unjustifiably questioned and caused
prolonged detainment of the defendant leading to the defendants subsequent arrest,
which was not supported by probable cause.

Disposition/Decision
The Supreme Court of Illinois upheld the decision that the defendants Fourth
Amendment rights were violated. Affirmed.

Page 2