Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Illinois opinions name it 1 courts 2014–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Beckergreen2 sentences2015Evidentiary rulings made pursuant to the rape- shield statute are reviewed for an abuse of discretion (Santos, 211 Ill. 2d at 401 ), which “occurs where the trial court’s decision is arbitrary, fanciful or unreasonable [citation] or where no reasonable person would agree with the position adopted by the trial court” (People v. Becker, 239 Ill. 2d 215, 234 (2010)). ¶ 43 Thus, the rape-shield statute does not bar all evidence of past sexual activity, only evidence of past sexual activity that is not relevant to the charges at issue. 2014Evidentiary rulings made pursuant to the rape- shield statute are reviewed for an abuse of discretion (Santos, 211 Ill. 2d at 401 ), which “occurs where the trial court’s decision is arbitrary, fanciful or unreasonable [citation] or where no reasonable person would agree with the position adopted by the trial court” (People v. Becker, 239 Ill. 2d 215, 234 (2010)). ¶ 43 Thus, the rape-shield statute does not bar all evidence of past sexual activity, only evidence of past sexual activity that is not relevant to the charges at issue. | 3 | 3 |
In Re EHgreen2 sentences2017See In re E.H., 224 Ill. 2d 172, 180-81 (2006). ¶ 67 If a defendant like Encalado must be allowed to ask prospective jurors about prostitution because without that question he cannot be assured of a fair and impartial jury, then all a defendant need do to circumvent the protections of the rape shield statute is claim that the victim is a prostitute and that his patronization of a prostitute is so sensitive as to mandate voir dire questioning on the subject. 2017See In re E.H., 224 Ill. 2d 172, 180-81 (2006). ¶ 67 If a defendant like Encalado must be allowed to ask prospective jurors about prostitution because without that question he cannot be assured of a fair and impartial jury, then all a defendant need do to circumvent the protections of the rape shield statute is claim that the victim is a prostitute and that his patronization of a prostitute is so sensitive as to mandate voir dire questioning on the subject. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Ivorygreen1 sentence2022See People v. Ivory, 139 Ill. App. 3d 448, 453 (1985) (the rape shield law mandates the exclusion of evidence of the victim’s alleged profession as a prostitute). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Santos
green
2 sentences2015Evidentiary rulings made pursuant to the rape- shield statute are reviewed for an abuse of discretion (Santos, 211 Ill. 2d at 401 ), which “occurs where the trial court’s decision is arbitrary, fanciful or unreasonable [citation] or where no reasonable person would agree with the position adopted by the trial court” (People v. Becker, 239 Ill. 2d 215, 234 (2010)). ¶ 43 Thus, the rape-shield statute does not bar all evidence of past sexual activity, only evidence of past sexual activity that is not relevant to the charges at issue. 2014Evidentiary rulings made pursuant to the rape- shield statute are reviewed for an abuse of discretion (Santos, 211 Ill. 2d at 401 ), which “occurs where the trial court’s decision is arbitrary, fanciful or unreasonable [citation] or where no reasonable person would agree with the position adopted by the trial court” (People v. Becker, 239 Ill. 2d 215, 234 (2010)). ¶ 43 Thus, the rape-shield statute does not bar all evidence of past sexual activity, only evidence of past sexual activity that is not relevant to the charges at issue. | 3 | 2014–2015 |
People v. Okoro
green
1 sentence2025Okoro, 2022 IL App (1st) 201254, ¶ 60 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Starks
green
1 sentence2020Id. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.