ILCS » Chapter 720 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

720 ILCS 5/36-2 (2026)

Complaint for forfeiture

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(720 ILCS 5/36-2) (from Ch. 38, par. 36-2)
    Sec. 36-2. Complaint for forfeiture.
    (a) If the State's Attorney of the county in which such seizure occurs finds that the alleged violation of law giving rise to the seizure was incurred without willful negligence or without any intention on the part of the owner of the vessel or watercraft, vehicle, or aircraft or any person whose right, title, or interest is of record as described in Section 36-1 of this Article, to violate the law, or finds the existence of such mitigating circumstances as to justify remission of the forfeiture, he or she may cause the law enforcement agency having custody of the property to return the property to the owner within a reasonable time not to exceed 7 days. The State's Attorney shall exercise his or her discretion under this subsection (a) prior to or promptly after the preliminary review under Section 36-1.5.
    (b) If, after review of the facts surrounding the seizure, the State's Attorney is of the opinion that the seized property is subject to forfeiture and the State's Attorney does not cause the forfeiture to be remitted under subsection (a) of this Section, he or she shall bring an action for forfeiture in the circuit court within whose jurisdiction the seizure and confiscation has taken place by filing a verified complaint for forfeiture in the circuit court within whose jurisdiction the seizure occurred, or within whose jurisdiction an act or omission giving rise to the seizure occurred, subject to Supreme Court Rule 187. The complaint shall be filed as soon as practicable but not later than 28 days after the State's Attorney receives notice from the seizing agency as provided under Section 36-1.4 of this Article. A complaint of forfeiture shall include:
        (1) a description of the property seized;
        (2) the date and place of seizure of the property;
        (3) the name and address of the law enforcement
    
agency making the seizure; and
        (4) the specific statutory and factual grounds for
    
the seizure.
    The complaint shall be served upon each person whose right, title, or interest is of record in the office of the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Transportation, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency, or any other department of this State, or any other state of the United States if the vessel or watercraft, vehicle, or aircraft is required to be so registered, as the case may be, the person from whom the property was seized, and all persons known or reasonably believed by the State to claim an interest in the property, as provided in this Article. The complaint shall be accompanied by the following written notice:
    "This is a civil court proceeding subject to the Code of Civil Procedure. You received this Complaint of Forfeiture because the State's Attorney's office has brought a legal action seeking forfeiture of your seized property. This complaint starts the court process where the State seeks to prove that your property should be forfeited and not returned to you. This process is also your opportunity to try to prove to a judge that you should get your property back. The complaint lists the date, time, and location of your first court date. You must appear in court on that day, or you may lose the case automatically. You must also file an appearance and answer. If you are unable to pay the appearance fee, you may qualify to have the fee waived. If there is a criminal case related to the seizure of your property, your case may be set for trial after the criminal case has been resolved. Before trial, the judge may allow discovery, where the State can ask you to respond in writing to questions and give them certain documents, and you can make similar requests of the State. The trial is your opportunity to explain what happened when your property was seized and why you should get the property back."
    (c) (Blank).
    (d) (Blank).
    (e) (Blank).
    (f) (Blank).
    (g) (Blank).
    (h) (Blank).
(Source: P.A. 99-78, eff. 7-20-15; 100-512, eff. 7-1-18; 100-699, eff. 8-3-18; 100-1163, eff. 12-20-18.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases, 1993–2018 · leading case: People v. One 1998 GMC, 2011 IL 110236 (Ill. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. One 1998 GMC, 2011 IL 110236 (Ill. 2011). · cites it 12× “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2006). ¶4 George Reardon did not contest the State’s complaint within the 20-day period, but Linda Reardon, secretary of Reardon Painting, Inc.”
People v. ONE 1998 GMC, 960 N.E.2d 1071 (Ill. 2011). · cites it 13× “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2006). ¶ 4 George Reardon did not contest the State's complaint within the 20-day period, but Linda Reardon, secretary of Reardon Painting, Inc.”
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). · cites it 4× “¶ 80 The foregoing principles are fundamental to our assessment of whether the State met its burden of establishing that the forfeiture challenged by the owner in this case comported with Illinois law.”
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). · cites it 4× “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(c) (West 2012); People v.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 7× “720 ILCS 5/36-2(b) (West 2014). The owner may thereafter file a verified answer to the State’s complaint and “may appear at the hearing on the action for forfeiture.”
People v. ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2016 IL App (5th) 150035 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 2× “720 ILCS 5/36-2(d) (West 2014); People v.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 8× “" 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2014). Section 36-2 directs that if the State's Attorney does not remit the forfeiture, then he or she "shall forthwith bring an action for forfeiture" and give notice to the owner of record.”
People v. ex re. Nerheim v. 2005 Black Chevrolet Corvette, 2015 IL App (2d) 131267 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 2× “720 ILCS 5/36-2 (West 2012). ¶ 19 We will not disturb a trial court’s findings in a forfeiture action unless they are against the manifest weight of the evidence.”
People v. Borash, 820 N.E.2d 74 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “Lastly, defendant argues that the trial court erred in ordering the forfeiture of his camera where the State failed to comply with the forfeiture proceedings set forth in section 36-2 of the Criminal Code of 1961 (the Code) (720 ILCS 5/36-2 (West 2000)). Following defendant's…”
United States v. One 1987 Mercedes Benz Roadster 560 Sec, Vin Wdbba48d3ha064462, 2 F.3d 241 (7th Cir. 1993). “This statute, which is recodi-fied at 720 ILCS 5/36-2 (1993), is applicable to the instant case and has not been amended since the Mercedes was seized.”
People v. 1991 Chevrolet Camaro, 620 N.E.2d 563 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993). “36-2 (now 720 ILCS 5/36-2 (West 1992)). The State must also release a vehicle to a “lienholder or secured party whose right, title or interest is of record *** if such lienholder or secured party shows to the State’s Attorney that his lien or secured interest is bona fide and…”
People v. One 2005 Acura RSX, 2017 IL App (4th) 160595 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017). “-4- ¶ 18 Section 19-2 of the Criminal Code (720 ILCS 5/19-2(a) (West 2014)) provides a person commits possession of burglary tools, a Class 4 felony, when “he or she possesses any key, tool, instrument, device, or any explosive, suitable for use in breaking into a building,…”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) — 3 cases
People v. One 1998 GMC, 2011 IL 110236 (Ill. 2011). “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2006). ¶4 George Reardon did not contest the State’s complaint within the 20-day period, but Linda Reardon, secretary of Reardon Painting, Inc.”
People v. ONE 1998 GMC, 960 N.E.2d 1071 (Ill. 2011). “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2006). ¶ 4 George Reardon did not contest the State's complaint within the 20-day period, but Linda Reardon, secretary of Reardon Painting, Inc.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “" 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2014). Section 36-2 directs that if the State's Attorney does not remit the forfeiture, then he or she "shall forthwith bring an action for forfeiture" and give notice to the owner of record.”
— 720 ILCS 5/36-2(b) — 2 cases
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/36-2(b) (West 2014). The owner may thereafter file a verified answer to the State’s complaint and “may appear at the hearing on the action for forfeiture.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “" 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2014). Section 36-2 directs that if the State's Attorney does not remit the forfeiture, then he or she "shall forthwith bring an action for forfeiture" and give notice to the owner of record.”
— 720 ILCS 5/36-2(c) — 4 cases
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). “¶ 80 The foregoing principles are fundamental to our assessment of whether the State met its burden of establishing that the forfeiture challenged by the owner in this case comported with Illinois law.”
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(c) (West 2012); People v.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/36-2(b) (West 2014). The owner may thereafter file a verified answer to the State’s complaint and “may appear at the hearing on the action for forfeiture.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “" 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2014). Section 36-2 directs that if the State's Attorney does not remit the forfeiture, then he or she "shall forthwith bring an action for forfeiture" and give notice to the owner of record.”
— 720 ILCS 5/36-2(d) — 3 cases
People v. ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2016 IL App (5th) 150035 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/36-2(d) (West 2014); People v.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/36-2(b) (West 2014). The owner may thereafter file a verified answer to the State’s complaint and “may appear at the hearing on the action for forfeiture.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “" 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2014). Section 36-2 directs that if the State's Attorney does not remit the forfeiture, then he or she "shall forthwith bring an action for forfeiture" and give notice to the owner of record.”
— 720 ILCS 5/36-2(e) — 6 cases
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). “¶ 80 The foregoing principles are fundamental to our assessment of whether the State met its burden of establishing that the forfeiture challenged by the owner in this case comported with Illinois law.”
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(c) (West 2012); People v.”
People v. ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2016 IL App (5th) 150035 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/36-2(d) (West 2014); People v.”
People v. ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2016 IL App (5th) 150035 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/36-2(b) (West 2014). The owner may thereafter file a verified answer to the State’s complaint and “may appear at the hearing on the action for forfeiture.”
— 720 ILCS 5/36-2(f) — 2 cases
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “720 ILCS 5/36-2(b) (West 2014). The owner may thereafter file a verified answer to the State’s complaint and “may appear at the hearing on the action for forfeiture.”
People ex rel. Kelly v. One 2008 Chevrolet Trailblazer, 2016 IL App (5th) 150338 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “" 720 ILCS 5/36-2(a) (West 2014). Section 36-2 directs that if the State's Attorney does not remit the forfeiture, then he or she "shall forthwith bring an action for forfeiture" and give notice to the owner of record.”
— 720 ILCS 5/36-2(h) — 2 cases
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). “¶ 80 The foregoing principles are fundamental to our assessment of whether the State met its burden of establishing that the forfeiture challenged by the owner in this case comported with Illinois law.”
People ex rel. Hartrich v. 2010 Harley-Davidson, 2018 IL 121636 (Ill. 2018). “See 720 ILCS 5/36-2(c) (West 2012); People v.”
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.