(Tarver, D-Chicago; Ventura, D-Joliet) amends the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 and the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 to expand the definition of “protected person” in provisions prohibiting certain deceptive tactics during custodial interrogation to include persons with severe or profound intellectual or developmental disabilities. Passed both chambers.
(Niemerg, R-Teutopolis; Rose, R-Champaign) amends the Code of Criminal procedure to make a rebuttable presumption that the testimony of a victim who is a child under 13 years of age may testify outside the courtroom to be shown in the courtroom by means of closed-circuit television. This presumption may be overcome if the defendant can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the child victim will not suffer severe emotional distress. Before the court permits the testimony of victims under this Section by means of a closed-circuit television, the court must make a finding that the testimony does not prejudice the defendant. Passed both chambers.
(Jimenez, D-Chicago; Simmons, D-Chicago) amends the Juvenile Court Act to give judges more discretion in sentencing if the minor was a survivor of sexual assault, sex trafficking or domestic violence. Passed both chambers.
(Costa-Howard, D-Lombard; Halpin, D-Rock Island) amends the guardian ad litem statute in the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act to clarify and resolve issues with the duties of guardian ad litem. These changes are as follows:
● Requiring a written report or recommendations not less than 30 days before a final hearing or trial unless the court directs otherwise. It also allows the judge to direct that the GAL propose an allocation order in addition to the written report or recommendations. This is to prevent going to trial and having a “surprise” GAL recommendation at trial with no writing provided in advance.
● It also states that the report or recommendations are to be admitted into evidence without the need for any foundation.
● Allows the GAL, at the discretion of the court, to:
(a) be present for all proceedings, including in-camera examinations of the child;
(b) issue subpoenas for records as part of his or her investigation; and
(c) file pleadings relating to procedural matters.
House Bill 1555 has passed both chambers.
Respondent father appealed from an adjudication finding neglect as to his minor child and a dispositional order adjudicating the minor a ward of the court. On appeal, respondent argued that the adjudicatory finding of neglect was improper and deprived him of due process where the petition made no allegations against him, that the finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence, and that the order should be reversed because the circuit court failed to provide a factual basis for its disposition. The appellate court affirmed, finding that respondent’s arguments relating to the adjudicatory determination were moot because he did not challenge the court’s finding of dependency and that his arguments on that issue were without merit. The appellate court further found that the record supported the trial court’s finding that respondent was not able to care for the minor child at the time of the dispositional hearing and, as a result, it was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. (C.A. WALKER and TAILOR, concurring)
Respondent appealed from an order of the circuit court terminating her parental rights on the basis that she failed to show reasonable interest, concern, or responsibility for her minor child. The appellate court affirmed, concluding that the trial court’s order was not against the manifest weight of the evidence where the record supported a finding that the respondent did not fully engage with the required parent and therapy services, did not appropriately engage with her daughter, and was unable to comply with requirements regarding substance abuse. (FITZGERALD SMITH and COBBS, concurring)
The Department of Children and Family Services sought to remove a minor from the home of his foster mother, who intervened in the matter and sought a hearing on the necessity and appropriateness of the move. The trial court initially stayed the removal to allow briefing and a hearing on the issue, but subsequently lifted the stay before the hearing was conducted. Intervenor appealed the trial court’s decision to lift the stay. The appellate court vacated the lifting of the stay and remanded for further proceedings, finding that where there were no safety concerns the trial court should have stayed the removal and conducted a full hearing prior to lifting the stay. (McLAREN and BIRKETT, concurring)
(Gillespie, D-Arlington Heights) creates the Due Process for Youth Oversight Commission (Commission) to oversee the creation and implementation of a youth's statutory right to counsel in abuse and neglect proceedings conducted in accordance with the Juvenile Court Act of 1987.
Amends the Foster Children's Bill of Rights Act to expand the rights afforded to every child placed in foster care to include the right to have a court appoint an attorney to represent the youth in any abuse or neglect case who will advocate for the youth's wishes and make recommendations to the court regarding the youth's care. Provides that this right applies to court proceedings pending or commenced on or after a date established by the Commission by administrative rule.
Amends the Juvenile Court Act of 1987.
Provides that immediately upon the filing of an abuse or neglect petition, the court shall appoint counsel for each minor who is the subject of that petition, unless the minor has already retained counsel. Provides that this requirement shall apply to court proceedings pending or commenced on or after a date established by the Commission by administrative rule. Provides that each respondent in any petition filed under the Act who is 8 years of age or older shall be furnished a written "Notice of Rights" at or before the first hearing at which the respondent appears.
Provides that counsel appointed by a court to represent a minor in neglect or abuse proceedings shall have a minimum of one in-person contact with the minor prior to each hearing and at least one in-person contact every quarter.
(Bryant, R-Murphysboro) amends the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act. It provides that, in addition to the factors the court shall consider when determining whether to grant visitation to certain non-parents, the court shall also consider whether there exist any other facts that establish that the loss of the relationship between the grandparent, great-grandparent, sibling, or step-parent and the child is likely to harm the child. Just introduced in the Senate.