Subject Index Criminal Law and Procedure

On Aug. 25, 2026, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that, in a prosecution for resisting or obstructing a police officer, the state does not have to prove the underlying offense for the arrest, or probable cause for that offense, beyond a reasonable doubt.

The General Assembly amended section 122-1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963, which governs postconviction petitions.

On June 5, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court reversed the dismissal of Johnny Conwell’s successive postconviction petition and remanded for further proceedings. The bar to successive postconviction petitions may be relaxed when the petitioner makes a prima facie showing of “cause and prejudice” for failing to raise the claim in earlier proceedings, which Conwell did.

On June 26, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that evolving science on late-adolescent brain development allowed a 20-year-old offender’s successive postconviction petition to proceed.

On June 10, 2026, the Third District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that section 110-6(f) limits a jail sanction to 30 days regardless of the number of pretrial-release violations alleged in the state’s petition.

On April 17, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a defendant raised a colorable actual-innocence claim based on newly discovered evidence of an investigating officer’s prior misconduct.

On April 10, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a defendant was entitled to a new trial where newly discovered recantation evidence undermined confidence in his murder conviction.

The General Assembly amended the Criminal Identification Act and Juvenile Court Act of 1987 to establish the Clean Slate Act. The Act creates an automatic sealing process for eligible criminal records without the filing of a petition. 

On April 8, 2026, the Third District of the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed Michael Southall’s convictions for attempted residential arson and aggravated domestic battery but vacated his domestic battery convictions under the one-act, one-crime rule. 

On April 7, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a trial court improperly detained a defendant pending a violation-of-probation hearing where the alleged violation was based solely on a new retail theft charge that was not detainable under the Pretrial Fairness Act.

On March 31, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that in-court statements only constitute direct criminal contempt when they are intended to create a clear and present danger to the administration of justice.

On March 27, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed that the state met its burden to justify pretrial detention by demonstrating that no conditions of release could mitigate a defendant’s threat to the victim or the community.

On March 27, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a criminal defendant must present some evidence that a murder victim’s use of force was unlawful to qualify for a self-defense jury instruction, that Lynch instructions require proof that the victim actually committed prior violent acts, and that a statutorily-required natural-life sentence was constitutional as applied to the mentally-disabled defendant.

On March 31, 2026, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that sufficient evidence of a defendant’s control over a vehicle can support a finding of constructive possession of a firearm, but that multiple convictions based on the same physical act violate the one-act, one-crime rule.

On March 26, 2026, the Second District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that the state may not make the same recording punishable twice on two different theories under section 11-20.1(a) of the Criminal Code of 2012.

On March 2, 2026, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a prior grant of an emergency civil no-contact order is sufficient to make a prima facie showing that a sexual offense was committed in support of a motion to have a civil no-contact petition heard in criminal court under section 112A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

On March 2, 2026, the Fifth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a trial court may not sua sponte vacate its order granting a defendant leave to file a successive postconviction petition after ruling on the state’s motion to dismiss and conducting a full evidentiary hearing.

The General Assembly amended the Rights of Crime Victims and Witnesses Act to expressly enshrine the right of a person who reports being a crime victim to be treated with fairness and respect during the investigatory process. 

On Dec. 16, 2025, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that, absent proof of an arrest, there is insufficient evidence to sustain a conviction for resisting arrest.

On Dec. 5, 2025, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that mandatory life sentences are inapplicable to defendants under the age of 21 at the time of the offense.

On Dec. 9, 2025, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a prior theft conviction is admissible to impeach the plaintiff’s credibility.

On Dec. 18, 2025, the Fifth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a weapon conviction based on a prior juvenile adjudication did not violate the Second Amendment.

On Dec. 15, 2025, the Second District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that an indictment alleging theft of “United States currency” was not fatally defective where the evidence showed the defendant unlawfully obtained wages through electronic direct deposits.

On Dec. 15, 2025, the Second District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that admitting a forensic laboratory report through a surrogate analyst violated the defendant’s confrontation clause rights.

On Dec. 4, 2025, the Illinois Supreme Court held that a 30-day imprisonment sanction is not a sentence under the County Jail Good Behavior Allowance Act and therefore does not entitle defendants to good-conduct credit.

On Oct. 23, 2025, the Illinois Supreme Court held that a petitioner seeking a certificate of innocence must prove innocence of every offense charged, including counts the state nol-prossed in a plea agreement in addition to the offense for which that petitioner was incarcerated.

The Illinois General Assembly amended the Stalking No Contact Order Act to clarify the types of conduct presumed to cause emotional distress and to refine the definition of stalking.

On Sept. 29, 2025, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a defendant who entered a fully negotiated guilty plea cannot, absent a withdrawal of the plea agreement, add presentence program credits that were not part of the agreement.

On Aug. 26, 2025, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a mistake about eligibility for an extended term does not convert a negotiated plea into an open plea.

On July 30, 2025, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that there is an abuse of discretion where the trial court erred in excluding testimony as cumulative.