Illinois Compiled Statutes
50 ILCS 725/3.9 (2026)
The officer under investigation shall have the right to be represented by counsel of his or her choosing and may request counsel at any time before or during interrogation
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(50 ILCS 725/3.9)
(from Ch. 85, par. 2562)
Sec. 3.9.
The officer under investigation shall have the right to be
represented by counsel of his or her choosing and may request counsel at
any time before or during interrogation. When such request for counsel
is made, no interrogation shall proceed until reasonable time and opportunity
are provided the officer to obtain counsel.
If a collective bargaining agreement requires the presence of a representative
of the collective bargaining unit during investigations, such representative
shall be present during the interrogation, unless this requirement is waived
by the officer being interrogated.
(Source: P.A. 83-981.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1997–2009 · leading case: Ehlers v. Jackson Cnty. Sheriff's Merit Comm'n, 697 N.E.2d 717 (Ill. 1998).
Ehlers v. Jackson Cnty. Sheriff's Merit Comm'n, 697 N.E.2d 717 (Ill. 1998). “" 50 ILCS 725/3.9 (West 1992). Under this provision, a union representative shall be present only (1) during an "interrogation" (2) if the collective-bargaining agreement requires the presence of a representative during investigations.”
Sherwood v. City of Aurora, 904 N.E.2d 632 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “2 (West 2006)); and the officer may have an attorney or union representative available to advise him during the interrogation (50 ILCS 725/3.9 (West 2006)). Accordingly, the Act is designed to provide a series of procedural protections to police officers when they are…”
Ehlers v. Jackson Cnty. Sheriff's Merit Comm'n, 683 N.E.2d 141 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997). “) 50 ILCS 725/3.9 (West 1992). The sheriff argues that when he asked Ehlers to talk to him, this was only an informal interview, not a formal interrogation.”
Sherwood v. City of Aurora (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “2 (West 2006)); and the officer may have an attorney or union representative available to advise him during the interrogation (50 ILCS 725/3.9 (West 2006)). Accordingly, the Act is designed to provide a series of procedural protections to police officers when they are…”
Ehlers v. Jackson Cnty. Sheriff's Merit Comm'n (Ill. 1998). “” 50 ILCS 725/3.9 (West 1992). Under this provision, a union representative shall be present only (1) during an “interrogation” (2) if the collective-bargaining agreement requires the presence of a representative during investigations.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
|