2025 Articles

Become an Illinois Bar Foundation Champion By Jessica R. Durkin December 2025 At least twice a year at ISBA Annual and Midyear Meetings, we are pitched by colleagues and the Illinois Bar Foundation to become a “Champion.” But what is a Champion really, and what’s in it for us?

Become an Illinois Bar Foundation Champion By John J. Rekowski January 2025 ISBA members who pledge to be a “Champion” are a major source of funding for the Illinois Bar Foundation. But what is a Champion really, and what’s in it for us?

Can a Defendant Be Charged with Both First-Degree Murder (720 ILCS 5/9-1(a)(2)) and an Aggravated DUI (625 ILCS 5/11-501(a) and 11-501(d)(1)(F))? By Dan Fultz May 2025 Illinois courts have upheld convictions where defendants were charged with both first-degree murder and aggravated DUI, as in People v. Eubanks and People v. Mischke. In Eubanks, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing a jury instruction on reckless homicide, a lesser included offense, because the difference lies in the defendant's mental state, which should be decided by the jury. In Mischke, the appellate court upheld concurrent sentences for both convictions, rejecting the defendant’s argument that the law required consecutive sentences. Overall, Illinois allows such dual charges when the defendant’s actions show a strong probability of causing death or great bodily harm.

Compulsory Joinder & Speedy Trial Revisited in People v. Covalt, 2025 IL 220346 By James Stern December 2025 The compulsory joinder statute requires all charges—based on the same act—to be prosecuted in a single prosecution if the offenses were known to the prosecution and are within the jurisdiction of the same court. The Illinois Supreme Court has explained that all charges subject to compulsory joinder are subject to the same speedy trial period. As such, the speedy trial period begins for all charges subject to compulsory joinder once the speedy trial demand is filed, even if the State files some charges at a later time.

Editor’s Corner By Mark Kevin Wykoff, Sr. August 2025 A note from the Editor regarding new guidance from the Illinois Supreme Court related to the Safety Act and COVID speedy trial tolling rules.

Electronic Home Monitoring Following People v. Stafford, 2025 IL App (2d) 240250 By Natalia Galica December 2025 In People v. Stafford, 2025 IL App (2d) 240250, the Second District held that the defendant was not entitled to credit for the time he spent on electronic home monitoring, building on past Supreme and Appellate court precedent regarding terms in the sentencing credit statute.

Guilty but Mentally Ill By Dan Fultz January 2025 A court faced with an insanity defense may find the defendant "not guilty by reason of insanity" or "guilty but mentally ill." Although both findings take into account the defendant's mental state at the time of the offense, the implications and consequences of each are different. An insanity defense is a complete affirmative defense and is equivalent to an acquittal. On the other hand, guilty but mentally ill is not an affirmative defense, but rather an alternative finding. A defendant who is found guilty but mentally ill is not absolved of criminal responsibility and thus may be sentenced for the offense of conviction.

Homicidal vs. Suicidal Intent By Dan Fultz May 2025 Fultz's article uses the case, People v. Oelerich, to illustrate how suicidal intent does not exempt a defendant from a first-degree murder conviction. In Oelerich, the defendant deliberately crashed his car while under the influence, claiming he intended to die, not to harm others. The court upheld his first-degree murder conviction, ruling that the act still met the knowledge standard since he knowingly created a strong probability of harming others. Suicidal intent does not negate the knowledge required for first-degree murder if the conduct foreseeably endangers others.

Implied Acquittal and Double Jeopardy By Mark Wykoff, Sr. December 2025 A second trial for first-degree murder when the jury had the opportunity to find the defendant guilty of first-degree murder at defendant's first trial, but did not do so, operates as an acquittal of first-degree murder, and a second prosecution for that offense is barred by principles of double jeopardy.

Intentional Homicide of an Unborn Child By Mark Wykoff, Sr. May 2025 In People v. Lane, 2023 IL 128269, the issue before the Illinois Supreme Court was whether a finding of guilty for both first-degree murder and intentional homicide of an unborn child constitutes multiple murders, triggering 5-8-1 of the Unified Code of Corrections (730 ILCS 5/5-8-1(a)(1)(c)(ii) (West 2006)), mandating a sentence of life in prison. In People v. Lane (2023), the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that killing a pregnant woman and her unborn child counts as only one murder for sentencing. Therefore, the mandatory life sentence under the multiple murder statute did not apply. The Court vacated Lane’s life sentence and ordered resentencing, also overruling the 1997 Third District Appellate case, People v. Shoultz, that treated such cases as multiple murders.

ISBA 2025 Solo and Small Firm Conference Photos December 2025 The Illinois State Bar Association hosted the 2025 Solo and Small Firm Conference: The Innovative Lawyer: Smart Strategies for Small Firms in the Age of AI on September 25–26 at the Embassy Suites in Naperville, IL.

No “Second Bite at the Apple” Pursuant to People v. Cousins By Anthony Bruno August 2025 In People v. Cousins, 2025 IL 130866, the Illinois Supreme Court clarified the consequences when the State fails to meet its burden in seeking pretrial detention under the Pretrial Fairness Act (PFA) (725 ILCS 5/110-6.1).

People v. Yankaway: Ready or Not, Here We Come By Hon. Robert McIntire August 2025 In People v. Yankaway, 2025 IL 130207, the Illinois Supreme Court analyzed how to deal with a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in the context of statutory speedy trial provisions.

Programming Sentencing Credits By Hon. Randy Rosenbaum January 2025 This article addresses programming sentencing credits that are available to defendants in the trial court. It does not address other sentencing credits such as truth-in-sentencing, earned sentencing credits, credits available in the Department of Corrections, or revocation of credits.

Reassignment on Remand in Criminal Cases: People v. Class, 2025 IL 129695 By Brendan Bukalski December 2025 The Illinois Supreme Court clarified Supreme Court Rule 615 earlier this year, in People v. Class, holding that an appellate court improperly ordered, sua sponte, reassignment of the judge on remand.

Safety Act Detention Hearing Timelines Following People v. Cooper By Hon. Joseph Pedersen August 2025 A summary of the recent Illinois Supreme Court case, People v. Cooper, which answered the following questions: What if the trial court fails to hold a detention hearing within those time periods as required by 725 ILCS 5/110-6.1(c)(2)? Is the trial court then required to release the defendant on conditions?

Save the Date: Criminal Justice Section Council Upcoming CLEs January 2025 Mark your calendars for upcoming live CLE events sponsored by ISBA’s Section on Criminal Justice.

Sniffing Out Justice: Illinois Supreme Court Redefines the Role of Cannabis Odor in Automobile Search Cases By Kulmeet S. Galhotra January 2025 An analysis of the 2024 Illinois Supreme Court rulings in People v. Molina and People v. Redmond that distinguish whether the odor of burnt or raw cannabis, alone, provides probable cause to search a vehicle.

Will Illinois Have a New Public Defender System? By John Rekowski May 2025 Illinois is considering HB 3363 to reform its public defense system by creating a State Public Defender and a State Public Defender Commission to support, not control, local public defenders. The main controversy is over who appoints local Chief Public Defenders—currently judges, but the bill proposes a state commission. The change aims to reduce conflicts of interest but faces strong opposition from judges and the Illinois State Bar Association.

Year 2000 Nonfirearm Version of Aggravated Criminal Sexual Assault Adding a 10-Year Enhancement Declared Unconstitutional By Mark Kevin Wykoff, Sr. January 2025 In People v. Taylor, 2024 IL App (4th) 231066, the Fourth District considered whether the aggravated criminal sexual assault statute that included a mandatory 10-year sentence enhancement when the perpetrator displayed, threatened to use, or used a dangerous weapon, other than a firearm, or any object fashioned or utilized in such a manner as to lead the victim *** to believe it to be a dangerous weapon, violated due process and was void ab initio. (720 ILCS 5/12-14(a)(1) (West 2006)).