In central Illinois, Sheriff’s Deputy Derek Suttles spotted a silver Volkswagen traveling well under the posted speed limit with a covering over the rear cargo area.

From 2013 to 2016, several law enforcement agencies investigated a methamphetamine distribution conspiracy in Illinois. The government installed three cameras on nearby utility poles to monitor the home of defendant Travis Tuggle. Two cameras viewed the front of Tuggle’s home and a nearby parking area. The third camera viewed a shed owned by codefendant, Joshua Vaultonburg.

In 2018, Alexander Bebris sent messages to a woman via Facebook Messenger, a private messaging system on Facebook. Facebook Messenger utilizes PhotoDNA, a Microsoft image-recognition program that provides the capability to scan images uploaded onto the company’s platform and compares the “hash,” or essence of a photo, with a database of known images of child pornography. After a “hit,” Facebook reviews the flagged images and sends them to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (“NCMEC”) through the CyberTipline.

Using three pole cameras mounted on public property to continuously monitor the exterior of a defendant’s home for 18 months without a warrant is not an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment, according to the Seventh Circuit.

On June 25, 2018, Illinois State Trooper Clayton Chapman was on highway patrol duties and received a message from Deputy Sheriff Derek Suttles about a hatchback with a California license plate on Interstate 72. Deputy Suttles reported to Trooper Chapman that the vehicle was going approximately 20 mph under the speed limit, and found it suspicious.

An officer who held his gun to a suspect’s head, while using the suspect as a “human shield,” was entitled to qualified immunity because the officer’s conduct did not violate clearly established law, the Seventh Circuit recently held.

In 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held the MSPB acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it dismissed an ATF employee’s Individual Right of Action appeal. The Seventh Circuit’s 2018 opinion found that the employee “properly alleged a ‘protected disclosure’ and exhausted his administrative remedies so that the Board had jurisdiction to evaluate the merits of his claim.” The MSPB AJ denied relief, and the employee appealed to the Seventh Circuit again. On July 16, 2020, the appeals court again held that the MSPB acted arbitrarily, capriciously, and contrary to law. This time, the remand to the MSPB was only on the extent of relief to the employee.