People v. Swift

4 Citing cases

  1. People v. Beck

    167 Ill. App. 3d 412 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988)   Cited 11 times
    In Beck, a drug enforcement agent received a call at 8:15 a.m. from a confidential informant, advising that defendant had approximately 10 pounds of cannabis in the trunk of his car.

    Moreover, there was insufficient independent corroboration of the tip to overcome deficiencies in areas of "basis of knowledge" and "reliability." In People v. Swift (1978), 61 Ill. App.3d 486, 378 N.E.2d 234, also cited by defendant, the testimony at the suppression hearing "wholly failed to meet the requirement of the second prong of the Aguilar test." (61 Ill. App.3d at 492, 378 N.E.2d at 237.)

  2. People v. Morris

    2021 Ill. App. 2d 190514 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021)

    As only a matter collateral to the purpose for which the statement was material was corroborated by Camp and Fox, the trial court could reasonably place diminished weight on this factor. See People v. Swift, 61 Ill.App.3d 486, 493 (1978). Defendant also points to the testimony of Reiter who stated that he saw three individuals walking toward the crime scene at approximately the time of the incident.

  3. People v. Gates

    82 Ill. App. 3d 749 (Ill. App. Ct. 1980)   Cited 7 times

    The affidavit attached to the complaint for search warrant does not reveal the manner in which the anonymous informer obtained or gathered his information. ( Cf. People v. Gomez (1980), 80 Ill. App.3d 668, 399 N.E.2d 1030 (informant had personal knowledge that crime had been committed); People v. Swift (1978), 61 Ill. App.3d 486, 378 N.E.2d 234 (informer was requested by defendant to participate in crime).) Thus, our inquiry turns to whether the judge could reasonably infer that the information was gained in a reliable fashion because of the great amount of detail supplied by the informer.

  4. People v. Andreat

    395 N.E.2d 728 (Ill. App. Ct. 1979)   Cited 4 times

    ) The corroboration of the informer's tip necessary to support a finding of probable cause must demonstrate in some manner that it was the arrestee and not someone else who committed the offense. Whiteley v. Warden (1971), 401 U.S. 560, 28 L.Ed.2d 306, 91 S.Ct. 1031; People v. Swift (1978), 61 Ill. App.3d 486, 378 N.E.2d 234. • 2 Applying these principles, we believe there was more than ample evidence to support a finding of probable cause to arrest defendant.