The Illinois Criminal Law Handbook

Start Here

Your Guide To Understanding
Illinois Criminal Law

If you’re looking for a resource to jump start your general criminal law awareness you’ve come to the right place. Consider this site to be your own private Illinois Criminal Law Handbook. Not sure where to start? Start here:

Search & Seizure | DUI Law | Crimes Index | Sentencing Checklist

The Most Popular Topics

• Illinois Search & Seizure – Here is resource guide on all the most important 4th amendment developments in Illinois.
• The Ultimate Police Car Search Guide – Everything you ever wanted know about police car searches, begins here.
• Illinois DUI Law – An update on Illinois DUI court case opinions.

The Index & Checklist

• Sentencing Checklist – Here is resource guide on all the most important 4th amendment developments in Illinois.
• Crimes Index– An update on Illinois DUI court case opinions.

CLE For Illinois Lawyers

• Free Ethics – 1 free hour of professional responsibility credit.
• All Your CLE– Learn more about obtaining criminal law CLE through a podcast.

What Is Criminal Causation?

Generally, when a crime requires both an act by defendant and a specified result of that act, the defendant’s act must be both the “cause in fact” of the result and the “proximate” or “legal” cause of the result.

The first requirement means that the defendant’s act must be an actual cause of the result.

This is a fundalmental question asking if the person’s actions can be tied to the harmful event. For example in drug-induced homicide case a jury will be instructed that…

“In order for you to find that the acts of the defendant caused the death of [the victim] the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant’s acts were a contributing cause of the death and that the death did not result from a cause unconnected with the defendant. However, it is not necessary that you find the acts of the defendant were the sole and immediate cause of death.”

Illinois Pattern Jury Instruction 7.15 – See Episode 541 (Duration 26:58)

What Is Criminal Proximate Cause?

People v. Mumaugh, 2018 IL App (3d) 140961 (January). Episode 453  (Duration 16:35) (Defendant’s Perfect Driving Was Not The Proximate Cause Of The Accident)

Once the prosecution has established that a defendant’s act was the cause in fact of a prohibited result the state must then establish the “proximate” or “legal” cause.

“Proximate cause” or “legal cause” is essentially a question of foreseeability.

The relevant inquiry is whether the injury is of a type that a reasonable person would see as a likely result of his or her conduct. In proximate cause disputes, Illinois courts draw a distinction between a condition and a cause.

There are some situations that a defendant may have factually caused, but the law is loath to apply blame because of the “randomness” of a result.

The test that should be applied in all proximate cause cases is whether the wrongdoer reasonably might have anticipated the intervening result would transpire after their own action.

The dispositive question is whether a defendant reasonably might have anticipated the harmful result as a natural and probable result of the his own actions i.e., whether the injury was of a type that a reasonable person would see as a likely result of his or her conduct.

Criminal Accountability

See Episode 054 (16:18) – What Is Criminal Accountability?

At its core, criminal accountability is the legal liability one is exposed to when they accused of a crime. Legal liability itself is just the idea that you can be punished for committing prohibited conduct.

This is simply the premise that society has the right to decide what type of behavior it wants to punish. A person who is blameworthy of prohibited conduct is considered legally liable or that conduct or you can say his is criminally accountable.

It’s obvious a person can be accountable for their own actions. Things get tricky when we begin to hold a person criminally accountable for another person’s actions.

See Illinois Compiled Statutes, 720 ILCS 5/5-2.

Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt

Go to People v. Downs, 2015 IL 117934 (June). Episode 080 (Duration 9:55) (Illinois Supreme Court says stop defining the term beyond a reasonable doubt for the jury.)

Once a person finds him or herself accused of a crime. We all know the state has to prove their case with proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Other state courts and the federal court system all provide their juries with a definition of the proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

We don’t do that in Illinois.

The Illinios Supreme Court has held that nothing describes or defines the term, “proof beyond a reasonable doubt”, better than the term itself. Therefore, a jury should only be instructed to find the defendant guilty if they find the state has proven it’s a case with proof beyond a reasonable doubt. No further definition of the term shall be given.

The idea is that the term speaks for itself.

Any attempt to further define it will itself lead to confusion and error. We want the jury to wrestle with the term as part of their deliberation process.

Other Foundational Elements

• Trial Procedure – An outline of the trial process marking where things can go wrong.
• Rules of Evidence– Examples of the Illinois Rules of Evidence and how they are used in criminal trials.
• Double Jeopardy Explained– A mini course (with videos) about everything that is misunderstood about double jeopardy.
• Drug Dog Resource Guide – A collection of drug dog cases and procedure.

Other Illinois Criminal Law Concepts

• Accountability – A brief review and understanding of criminal accountability.
• Mental State– A review of the various criminal law mental states.
• Krankel Hearing – Understand what should happen when ineffectiveness is raised.
• Structural Error– What is structural error? Hint: it’s bigger than constitutional error.
• Bail & Bond – How does bail and bond work in Illinois?
• The Charging Instrument– The form and structure of the charging document.
• Confessions – A collection of Illinois confessions cases asking if it was voluntary.
• Burglary– Illinois burglary statute and recent developments.
• SORA– Developments with the Illinois sex offender registration act.

Practical & Useful Stuff

• Change In Venue Motion – Professor Beckett explains how to win a venue change.
• Motion To Quash– How to file a proper motion to quash. (Hint: don’t call it a motion to quash)
• Cameron Hearing – How to keep out that which should be kept out but state tries to sneak in.
• Prior Inconsistent Statement  – Avoid the one trial error that trips everyone else up.
• GBMI v. Insanity Defense  – Difference between GBMI and insanity defense.
• Marisa Tomei – Hands down, the best criminal law teacher…Marisa Tomei.