Court Opinion

ID: 9712572
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:56:32.479821+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:13.147940
License: Public Domain

Mr. Chief Justice Underwood, dissenting: I am in complete agreement that the determining factors in this case, under the terms of the ordinance, are the reasonableness of the conduct of the defendants and whether a clear and present danger of a breach of the peace was created. I cannot agree with the Court’s conclusion that defendants’ conduct, in the context in which it occurred, was not disorderly. It is beyond dispute that the atmosphere on Michigan Avenue in Chicago at the point and time of defendants’ arrest was one of considerable tension. One of the officers testified that the volume of defendants’ shouting and screaming was such that it carried for hundreds of feet. There were 500 to 1000 people gathered a block away, and some of them, as a result of the clamor, were beginning to come over to the scene of the arrest. Thirty to forty people gathered in the immediate area, and vehicular traffic was slowing down. Even one of the defendants, who all attempted to portray the scene that night as one of urban tranquility, explained his anxiety at the scene of the arrest as due to “the amount of tension on Michigan Avenue that night.” In my opinion the conduct of defendants in these circumstances was sufficient to sustain the conviction. The implied suggestion by the Court that the “frisking” or “padding” of defendants was provocation for their conduct, is in my opinion, unsupportable. Even assuming the search unwarranted, a position with which I do not agree, the yelling, shouting reaction of defendants was, in my opinion, not justifiable. I would affirm. Mr. Justice Culbertson joins in this dissent.