ILCS » Chapter 720 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

720 ILCS 5/16-2 (2026)

Theft of lost or mislaid property

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(720 ILCS 5/16-2) (from Ch. 38, par. 16-2)
    Sec. 16-2. Theft of lost or mislaid property. A person commits theft of lost or mislaid property when he or she obtains control over the property and:
    (a) Knows or learns the identity of the owner or knows, or is aware of, or learns of a reasonable method of identifying the owner, and
    (b) Fails to take reasonable measures to restore the property to the owner, and
    (c) Intends to deprive the owner permanently of the use or benefit of the property.
    (d) Sentence.
    Theft of lost or mislaid property where:
        (1) the value does not exceed $500 is a Class B
    
misdemeanor;
        (2) the value exceeds $500 but does not exceed
    
$10,000 is a Class A misdemeanor; and
        (3) the value exceeds $10,000 is a Class 4 felony.
(Source: P.A. 97-597, eff. 1-1-12.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2004–2020 · leading case: People v. Powell, 822 N.E.2d 131 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Powell, 822 N.E.2d 131 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “, comparing first degree murder (720 ILCS 5/9-1 (West 2000)) to theft or lost or mislaid property (720 ILCS 5/16-2 (West 2000)). This, of course, would lead to both absurd results and a waste of judicial resources for, not only would the first step of the cross-comparison test…”
People v. Jones, 2020 IL App (1st) 172685-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “1-17-2685 ¶3 Defendant was charged with theft of lost or mislaid property (720 ILCS 5/16-2 (West 2016)) following an incident on December 21, 2016.”
People v. Powell (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “, comparing first degree murder (720 ILCS 5/9-1 (West 2000)) to theft or lost or mislaid property (720 ILCS 5/16-2 (West 2000)). This, of course, would lead to both absurd results and a waste of judicial resources for, not only would the first step of the cross-comparison test…”
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.