Defense challenges marijuana allegations tied to Lockport Township gun case

Defense attorneys in a Lockport Township gun case claim a vehicle search during a traffic stop was unjustified because a deputy claimed he could smell marijuana that was never recovered.

Will County Judge Amy Christiansen is expected to make a ruling on Feb. 11 on a defense motion to quash the arrest of Deamontae Hunter, 27, of Lockport Township, and suppress the evidence against him.

Hunter was the passenger of a vehicle on Aug. 26 that was pulled over in a traffic stop by a sheriff’s deputy after he saw the vehicle go “over the solid yellow lane markers,” according to a court filing from prosecutors.

The deputy smelled “fresh” marijuana “emitting” from the vehicle and found “small amounts” of marijuana residue on the driver floor board, the center console and the back seat arm rest, prosecutors said.

The marijuana residue “was not collected,” prosecutors said.

The deputy found a loaded 9 mm semiautomatic handgun under the front passenger seat, where Hunter was seated, prosecutors said.

Because of Hunter’s past felony convictions, he was arrested on charges of armed habitual criminal, unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon and aggravated unlawful use of a weapon.

Hunter’s attorneys with Joliet law firm King and Bondi argued in a Jan. 22 motion that the traffic stop was “prolonged unnecessarily without reasonable articulable suspicion” that any crime occurred.

The motion requests the invalidation of Hunter’s arrest and the suppression of evidence gathered against him because there was no justification for the traffic stop.

Hunter’s attorneys contend the deputy said he “could smell” marijuana yet no marijuana “was ever tested or recovered.”

His attorneys argued marijuana is “no longer a reason to search a vehicle.” They cited a 2024 ruling from the Illinois Supreme Court called People v. Redmond.

In that case, the supreme court ruled the smell of burnt marijuana alone is “insufficient to provide probable cause for police officers to perform a warrantless search of a vehicle.”

The supreme court later ruled in People v. Molina that the smell of raw marijuana coming from a vehicle is sufficient to provide police officers “with probable cause to perform a warrantless search of a vehicle.”

Chief Justice Mary Jane Theis and Justice Mary K. O’Brien disagreed with the majority opinion.

O’Brien said the court already concluded the smell of alcohol and burnt marijuana (absent any other factors) is not sufficient to establish probable cause to search a vehicle. She said the court should conclude the same for the smell of raw marijuana.

Sen. Rachel Ventura, D-Joliet, announced Jan. 30 that she introduced Senate Bill 42 to ensure the smell of raw or burnt marijuana alone should not constitute probable cause for vehicle searches.

“The supreme court gave a conflicting directive in [People v. Molina] between raw and burnt cannabis, shifting a huge burden to law enforcement to know the difference,” Ventura said in a statement.