Illinois Appellate Court extends Kladis to "Police Operational Devices (PODs)"

In the case of People v. Moravec, 2015 IL App (1st) 133869, the First District Appellate Court held that the the trial court did not abuse its discretion in barring officer testimony of events that may have been captured by a Police Operational Device "POD."  PODs are video cameras that are located at intersections around the city of Chicago that constantly rotate 360 degrees.  In Morevec, the Defendant's attorney served a subpoena on the Chicago Police Department "CPD" requesting video relating to the arrest of the defendant.  CPD responded that with regard to the several PODs that were in the area, none of them could be recovered since they had already been recorded over.  The Defendant filed a motion for sanctions, citing Kladis.  The trial court barred the testimony that would have been captured on a POD, including the stop, Field Sobriety Testing and the arrest of the Defendant, effectively making the prosecution's case unprovable.  The state appealed arguing that Kladis was a narrow decision that applied only to in-squad recordings, not rotating PODs located hundreds of feet away from an arrest.  The First District stated that the mere fact that POD cameras may not have captured 100% of the defendant's arrest does not mean that the videos are not discoverable.  In affirming the sanction, the First District also stated that the correct sanction for a discovery violation is a decision left to the trial court and the trial court's judgment shall be given great weight.  It should be noted that the defendant did not specifically request the POD videotape in any of his original discovery requests.  The court made its decision after concluding that the State had waived this issue by not bringing it up prior to its motion to reconsider.  Therefore, it is important for DUI defense lawyers to specifically request POD video.