People v. Holmes

1 Citing case

  1. People v. Lynch

    640 N.E.2d 979 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994)   1 Legal Analyses

    Based on the trial court's consideration of the evidence, some of which was conflicting, we conclude the trial court's finding that the defendant did not assert his privilege at the earliest opportunity is not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Additionally, we cannot conclude that judicial necessity required dismissal of the complaint because there was no showing that defendant's alleged arrest interfered in any way with defendant's ability to appear and accomplish his business with the court (see People v. Holmes (1980), 90 Ill. App.3d 606 (privilege from arrest did not grant immunity from prosecution; privilege narrowly construed based on judicial necessity where detention was brief and did not interfere with business of the court)). Because we have found two reasons why the trial court's decision may be affirmed, we deem the issue of whether there was an "arrest" moot.