Whether the Illinois state court erred in denying the petitioner's motion to suppress evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment
No question identified. : : Ga reasGnabledlaubt because st old nat Shou hot dlelindant. ; { lan J eo? ‘ \ . i ye. : . ——— : IRTSNICTION | | ence i ai ne es eee | Cui) ++ i " pace q {iHalbraok v. Flynn, 715 11,3. 560 (1986) ; 13 | Pwens v. Duncan, 781 Ec B60 (746 £0168) __ 13 lPople v. Alicea, ZO/9 ZL. App: Css 60Z . g, Bo €. 1A Qt, hed Ap. 3d 43) Cst Dist /97Z y Be ev. Bui, 381 L/h App. Sd B7P( 2008 , 6,16 | People anadine 5 /7 Alia. Bel ¢6 (£007, : : Peo nle_y. ” auton, LOIY TL, App ) [967 : . _ : op 2 olliv 06TH 2d Z 8 3 . [Pasa @ c Loningham, 309 Tl App. Bd 824 (19% b . _ People ¥, Deriton, £6' , Anp. 3d Clst Dist. 1 Y __. Pople v. Evans, 2016 LL App (Ist) 1309 ; in ; a i : , oe io ‘idle A ma ; al De ople_y. Hannah, £ol3 TL. App (/st-) Itlloloo _ 4 oe ev. Ma Carte I Lop 3d 87 (200 6,10 Be le_v. Malaurin t App. dd 15 (2002 , B Deo e loore., LO/S ZL APP LLOpsl ; g . Hao Neshit, 398 LiL App, Bt £00 (2016) _ : eagle v. Ra 4dth App, 2¢ d. Diet. 199Z, /0, : oop p Pobinse b : q 24 fo (Iv) \ ; i" [a XA ZO LA App 5 0, | . S54 tO 2Olb Tl App (la 40 ; 7 tu ited y te . raraia,GF. 3d AG: Cr, 00 . 1 nied States V. Moore, 572 F. Bel 234 (7 Cir. 2007) 13 ay Zz : of: fest 20) ; . i 2 08 5/103-2.1 Sectinn 9: aL. ir yy) : : . mu OPINTON BELO | [bh e_ Gllé és, f2 ADDQEUMA C ta: L4¥ 7) is 2: DUG: C10 / 3 et Lis tnélucleal_herein in