{
  "id": 5436576,
  "name": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LONNY R. STIPP, Defendant-Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "People v. Stipp",
  "decision_date": "2004-06-23",
  "docket_number": "No. 3-03-0480",
  "first_page": "955",
  "last_page": "959",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "349 Ill. App. 3d 955"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "780 N.E.2d 740",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "335 Ill. App. 3d 175",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        637042
      ],
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/335/0175-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "770 N.E.2d 228",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "329 Ill. App. 3d 1216",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        1472369
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2002,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/329/1216-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "689 N.E.2d 385",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1997,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "294 Ill. App. 3d 139",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App. 3d",
      "case_ids": [
        35386
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1997,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app-3d/294/0139-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "546 N.E.2d 580",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1989,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "131 Ill. 2d 428",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5569862
      ],
      "year": 1989,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/131/0428-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "521 N.E.2d 884",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "122 Ill. 2d 50",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        5549752
      ],
      "year": 1988,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/122/0050-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "720 N.E.2d 225",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1999,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "188 Ill. 2d 91",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        536114
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1999,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/188/0091-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "795 N.E.2d 174",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 2003,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "206 Ill. 2d 403",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        1578305
      ],
      "year": 2003,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/206/0403-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "667 N.E.2d 1305",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.2d",
      "year": 1996,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "172 Ill. 2d 452",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. 2d",
      "case_ids": [
        55998
      ],
      "year": 1996,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-2d/172/0452-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 409,
    "char_count": 7265,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.734,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.300207300906588e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4341131471371497
    },
    "sha256": "2633baf40eb101af93426b2ba6228bd36c9d0c78ee0ca76a3acf45b197d44be5",
    "simhash": "1:324d71a71d7720e1",
    "word_count": 1192
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:18:36.100393+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "BARRY and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LONNY R. STIPP, Defendant-Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "JUSTICE SLATER\ndelivered the opinion of the court;\nThe defendant, Lonny R. Stipp, was convicted of two counts of driving while under the influence of alcohol (625 ILCS 5/11 \u2014 501(a)(1), (a)(2) (West 2000)). He appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in admitting the results of his blood-alcohol test under section 11 \u2014 501.4 of the Illinois Vehicle Code (Code) (625 ILCS 5/11 \u2014 501.4 (West 2000)) because the test was conducted on his blood serum rather than his whole blood. We affirm.\nFACTS\nThe defendant was charged with driving with (1) a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more in violation of section 11 \u2014 501(a)(1) of the Code, and (2) driving while under the influence of alcohol in violation of section 11 \u2014 501(a)(2) (625 ILCS 5/11 \u2014 501(a)(1), (a)(2) (West 2000)). The defendant filed a motion in limine, seeking to suppress the chemical test conducted by the hospital on the grounds that his blood was taken without his consent and that it was not drawn in the course of providing emergency medical treatment. The trial court denied the motion.\nPrior to trial, the State noted that it was no longer necessary for an expert to testify as to the conversion factor from blood serum alcohol concentration to whole blood alcohol concentration (see 20 Ill. Adm. Code \u00a7 1286.40 (2001)). Based on the appropriate conversion factor of 1.18, the defendant\u2019s whole blood alcohol level was 0.24. The parties agreed that the jury would be given that number.\nAt the defendant\u2019s jury trial, the evidence established that the defendant was involved in a one-vehicle accident. When emergency personnel arrived at the scene, the defendant\u2019s truck was on fire and was stuck in a ditch. The defendant had lacerations on his face and was confused. Emergency medical technicians transported the defendant to the hospital, where his blood was drawn by hospital staff as part of standard hospital procedure. The blood sample was then sent to the hospital laboratory. Once in the lab, the defendant\u2019s blood serum was extrapolated from his whole blood and analyzed for alcohol content. The test results determined that the defendant\u2019s blood serum alcohol level was 284.\nThe laboratory technician who conducted the test testified that a result of 284 translated to a blood serum alcohol level of 0.284 grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood. He further testified that blood serum contains a higher concentration of alcohol than whole blood and that the conversion factor from blood serum to whole blood alcohol concentration was 1.18. The blood serum test results were admitted over the defendant\u2019s objection.\nThe jury found the defendant guilty of both counts. The defendant\u2019s motion for a new trial was denied, and he was sentenced to 18 months\u2019 conditional discharge.\nANALYSIS\nOn appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court erred in admitting his blood test results. He maintains that the results were inadmissible because the test was conducted on his blood serum rather than his whole blood as required by section 11 \u2014 501.4. The issue so framed is one of statutory construction, which we review de novo. People v. Robinson, 172 Ill. 2d 452, 667 N.E.2d 1305 (1996).\nIn Illinois, a blood sample tested to determine a defendant\u2019s blood-alcohol concentration may be taken from a defendant during the regular course of providing emergency medical treatment. 625 ILCS 5/11 \u2014 501.4 (West 2000). Under section 11 \u2014 501.4 of the Code, \u201cthe results of blood tests performed for the purpose of determining the content of alcohol *** of an individual\u2019s blood conducted upon persons receiving medical treatment in a hospital emergency room are admissible.\u201d 625 ILCS 5/11 \u2014 501.4 (West 2000). For the purposes of his argument, the defendant maintains that the term \u201cblood\u201d as used in section 11 \u2014 501.4 means whole blood and that blood serum tests are therefore inadmissible. We disagree.\nThe primary rule of statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the legislature\u2019s intent. People v. Rissley, 206 Ill. 2d 403, 795 N.E.2d 174 (2003). Where the statutory language is clear and unambiguous, its plain meaning should be given effect. People v. Whitney, 188 Ill. 2d 91, 720 N.E.2d 225 (1999). However, if the language of the statute is ambiguous, the court may consider extrinsic aids to determine the legislative intent. Whitney, 188 Ill. 2d 91, 720 N.E.2d 225. Ambiguities in a statute may be resolved by construing the statute in conjunction with other statutes addressing the same subject. People v. Badoud, 122 Ill. 2d 50, 521 N.E.2d 884 (1988).\nIn this case, the trial court properly admitted the blood serum test results under section 11 \u2014 501.4 of the Code. The term \u201cblood\u201d as used in chapter 11 is not defined within the Code. Since it is apparent that a blood-alcohol-concentration test can be performed on whole blood as well as blood serum, we find that portion of section 11 \u2014 501.4 ambiguous.\nHaving determined that section 11 \u2014 501.4 is ambiguous, it is appropriate to consider extrinsic evidence to aid in our interpretation of the statute. Reference to another statute by analogy is a common method of interpretation and has been relied upon by this court on many occasions. See, e.g., Board of Education of City of Chicago v. A, C & S, Inc., 131 Ill. 2d 428, 546 N.E.2d 580 (1989). In interpreting other provisions of chapter 11 of the Code, this court has determined that whole blood is the standard unit required. People v. Green, 294 Ill. App. 3d 139, 689 N.E.2d 385 (1997). Thus, the whole blood alcohol concentration test results are clearly admissible under section 11\u2014 501.4.\nThe question before us, however, is whether blood serum alcohol concentration test results are admissible under the same section. Nothing in the language of section 11 \u2014 501.4 prohibits the use of blood serum test results in lieu of a whole blood alcohol concentration test. See People v. Thoman, 329 Ill. App. 3d 1216, 770 N.E.2d 228 (2002). Further, numerous cases have held that blood serum alcohol concentration test results converted into whole blood equivalents are admissible under section 11 \u2014 501 and section 11 \u2014 501.2. Green, 294 Ill. App. 3d 139, 689 N.E.2d 385; Thoman, 329 Ill. App. 3d 1216, 770 N.E.2d 228; People v. Luth, 335 Ill. App. 3d 175, 780 N.E.2d 740 (2002). We therefore interpret \u201cblood\u201d as used in section 11 \u2014 501.4 to allow the admission of: (1) whole blood alcohol concentration test results; and (2) blood serum alcohol concentration test results where evidence is presented that converts the results into whole blood equivalents.\nIn this case, the State presented evidence concerning the conversion of blood serum alcohol results to whole blood equivalents. The results were therefore properly admitted under section 11 \u2014 501.4.\nCONCLUSION\nThe judgment of the circuit court of Kankakee County is affirmed.\nAffirmed.\nBARRY and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "JUSTICE SLATER"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "John E Ridge, of Kankakee, for appellant.",
      "Edward D. Smith, State\u2019s Attorney, of Kankakee (Lawrence M. Bauer and Terry A. Mertel, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LONNY R. STIPP, Defendant-Appellant.\nThird District\nNo. 3\u201403\u20140480\nOpinion filed June 23, 2004.\nJohn E Ridge, of Kankakee, for appellant.\nEdward D. Smith, State\u2019s Attorney, of Kankakee (Lawrence M. Bauer and Terry A. Mertel, both of State\u2019s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor\u2019s Office, of counsel), for the People."
  },
  "file_name": "0955-01",
  "first_page_order": 973,
  "last_page_order": 977
}