POT BUST SPURS SUPREME COURT HEARING ON SEARCH AND SEIZURE

SULLIVAN, Illinois (AP) -- Police knew it, and Charles McArthur even admits
it: If he had had the chance to enter his trailer alone, he would have
destroyed any evidence of marijuana.

So for the two hours it took to obtain a search warrant, police did not let
McArthur re-enter his home unless he was accompanied by an officer. Then
they conducted a search, found marijuana and arrested him.

That decision -- made three years ago in this small Illinois town over a
misdemeanor drug offense -- was to be reviewed Wednesday by the U.S.
Supreme Court.

The high court's ruling could help define boundaries between an
individual's right to come and go from his home and the police's power to
preserve evidence of a crime.

"I think it was definitely wrong to tell somebody they can't go back in
their house unless the police is with them," McArthur said. "I think they
need to have a clearer law on what they can and can't do."

So far, McArthur, 30, an employee at a paper manufacturing plant, has won
every step of the way in battling charges of possessing drug paraphernalia
and less than 2.5 grams of cannabis.

A trial judge threw out the evidence, a state appellate court agreed and
the Illinois Supreme Court let the ruling stand.

Assistant Police Chief John Love says he did all he could in a tightwire
act to protect McArthur's rights and simultaneously preserve evidence.

"I chose to do it the right way, the best way for everybody - and the
fairest way to him," he said.

The case began April 2, 1997, when McArthur's estranged wife had police
wait outside their trailer as she moved out. When she left, she told police
her husband had marijuana under a couch.

Love knocked on the trailer door and confronted McArthur. McArthur stood
outside, denied his wife's accusation and declined to allow a search.

Love had an officer leave to get a warrant and did not let McArthur
re-enter the trailer unless he was with police. McArthur has since
testified that if he had entered alone, he would have destroyed the evidence.

"My guys went out of their way to respect Mr. McArthur's rights. That's the
least restrictive thing they could have done and performed their jobs,"
Moultrie County State's Attorney Tim Willis said. "They could have kicked
the door down. They didn't do that."

"If the Supreme Court rules against us generally ... people are going to
get away with crimes," he said.

Another resident of the trailer park in this town of 4,400 said an
aggressive search would be understandable if a more serious offense had
been committed.

"If people were selling drugs here, that's another thing," Mike Makos said.
"Then come and take the whole trailer."

McArthur's attorney said she will make a similar argument to the Supreme Court.

"Our point is there are some crimes so small the government's interests in
prosecuting the crimes are not going to outweigh the protection of the
individual's Fourth Amendment rights," Deanne Fortna Jones said.

Illinois Solicitor General Joel Bertocchi indicated his response would be
that McArthur's alleged crimes, while misdemeanors, are "serious enough."

For his part, McArthur just wants to put the case behind him.

"It's just been a giant headache for me for three years," McArthur said.
"It was a marijuana charge. I'm not proud of that."