ILCS » Chapter 720 · Act 550
Illinois Compiled Statutes

720 ILCS 550/12 (2026)

Forfeiture

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(720 ILCS 550/12) (from Ch. 56 1/2, par. 712)
    Sec. 12. Forfeiture.
    (a) The following are subject to forfeiture:
        (1) (blank);
        (2) all raw materials, products, and equipment of any
    
kind which are produced, delivered, or possessed in connection with any substance containing cannabis in a felony violation of this Act;
        (3) all conveyances, including aircraft, vehicles, or
    
vessels, which are used, or intended for use, to transport, or in any manner to facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession, or concealment of any substance containing cannabis or property described in paragraph (2) of this subsection (a) that constitutes a felony violation of the Act, but:
            (i) no conveyance used by any person as a common
        
carrier in the transaction of business as a common carrier is subject to forfeiture under this Section unless it appears that the owner or other person in charge of the conveyance is a consenting party or privy to the violation;
            (ii) no conveyance is subject to forfeiture under
        
this Section by reason of any act or omission which the owner proves to have been committed or omitted without his or her knowledge or consent;
            (iii) a forfeiture of a conveyance encumbered by
        
a bona fide security interest is subject to the interest of the secured party if he or she neither had knowledge of nor consented to the act or omission;
        (4) all money, things of value, books, records, and
    
research products and materials including formulas, microfilm, tapes, and data which are used, or intended for use, in a felony violation of this Act;
        (5) everything of value furnished or intended to be
    
furnished by any person in exchange for a substance in violation of this Act, all proceeds traceable to such an exchange, and all moneys, negotiable instruments, and securities used, or intended to be used, to commit or in any manner to facilitate any felony violation of this Act;
        (6) all real property, including any right, title,
    
and interest including, but not limited to, any leasehold interest or the beneficial interest in a land trust, in the whole of any lot or tract of land and any appurtenances or improvements, that is used or intended to be used to facilitate the manufacture, distribution, sale, receipt, or concealment of a substance containing cannabis or property described in paragraph (2) of this subsection (a) that constitutes a felony violation of this Act involving more than 2,000 grams of a substance containing cannabis or that is the proceeds of any felony violation of this Act.
    (b) Property subject to forfeiture under this Act may be seized under the Drug Asset Forfeiture Procedure Act. In the event of seizure, forfeiture proceedings shall be instituted under the Drug Asset Forfeiture Procedure Act.
    (c) Forfeiture under this Act is subject to an 8th Amendment to the United States Constitution disproportionate penalties analysis as provided under Section 9.5 of the Drug Asset Forfeiture Procedure Act.
    (c-1) With regard to possession of cannabis offenses only, a sum of currency with a value of less than $500 shall not be subject to forfeiture under this Act. For all other offenses under this Act, a sum of currency with a value of less than $100 shall not be subject to forfeiture under this Act. In seizures of currency in excess of these amounts, this Section shall not create an exemption for these amounts.
    (d) (Blank).
    (e) (Blank).
    (f) (Blank).
    (g) (Blank).
    (h) Contraband, including cannabis possessed without authorization under State or federal law, is not subject to forfeiture. No property right exists in contraband. Contraband is subject to seizure and shall be disposed of according to State law.
    (i) The changes made to this Section by Public Act 100-512 and Public Act 100-699 only apply to property seized on and after July 1, 2018.
    (j) The changes made to this Section by Public Act 100-699 are subject to Section 4 of the Statute on Statutes.
(Source: P.A. 99-686, eff. 7-29-16; 100-512, eff. 7-1-18; 100-699, eff. 8-3-18; 100-1163, eff. 12-20-18.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · 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 2× “(West 2008)), and the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2008)) did not violate due process simply because they did not provide for a prompt, probable cause hearing).”
People v. A Parcel of Prop. Commonly Known as 1945 North 31st Street, Decatur, Macon Cnty., Illinois, 841 N.E.2d 928 (Ill. 2005). “” The State alleged, therefore, that the real estate was subject to forfeiture under the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12(a) (West 2002)) or the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (720 ILCS 570/ 505(a) (West 2002)).”
People v. ONE 1998 GMC, 960 N.E.2d 1071 (Ill. 2011). · cites it 2× “We now consider the constitutionality of the vehicle forfeiture provisions at issue. ¶ 11 ANALYSIS ¶ 12 I.”
People ex rel. Alvarez v. $59,914 United States Currency, 2022 IL 126927 (Ill. 2022). “1 ¶7 On November 12, 2015, the State filed an in rem forfeiture complaint against the $223,743 pursuant to the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2014)), and section 7(1) of the Forfeiture Act (725 ILCS 150/7(1) (West 2014)), which presumes money found in “close…”
People v. One 2000 Ford F-350 Pickup Truck, 788 N.E.2d 387 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 5× “The statute, section 12 of the Cannabis Control Act (Act), provides that “all conveyances, including aircraft, vehicles or vessels,” are subject to forfeiture if they are used “to facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession, or concealment” of an amount of cannabis…”
People Ex Rel. Neal v. Ryan, 672 N.E.2d 47 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). · cites it 3× “” 720 ILCS 550/12 (West 1994). Initially, in our review, we note that the forfeiture provisions of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (see 720 ILCS 570/505 (West 1994)) are identical to those in the Cannabis Control Act.”
People v. $174,980 United States Currency, 2013 IL App (1st) 122480 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). · cites it 3× “BACKGROUND ¶3 On September 13, 2011, the State filed a civil complaint for the forfeiture of the currency, pursuant to the relevant forfeiture provisions of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (720 ILCS 570/505(a)(5) (West 2010)), the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS…”
People v. Single Story House, 2012 IL App (5th) 110562 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 18× “OPINION ¶1 In December 2007, the State filed in the circuit court of Randolph County a complaint for forfeiture, pursuant to the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2006)), of a single-story house at 9972 Surman Lane in Chester, Illinois.”
People v. 1995 Ford Van, 809 N.E.2d 811 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “720 ILCS 550/12(a)(3), (d) (West 2002)) and therefore did not base our decision on the Act language, added in 1990, that a criminal acquittal does not bar a civil forfeiture action.”
United States v. One 1987 Mercedes Benz Roadster 560 Sec, Vin Wdbba48d3ha064462, 2 F.3d 241 (7th Cir. 1993). “Both statutes have since been amended and are recodified at 720 ILCS 570/505 (1993) and 720 ILCS 550/12 (1993), respectively. The C-20 Van court also relied on § 36-2 of the Illinois Code of Criminal Procedure.”
People v. Norris, 767 N.E.2d 904 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “ction 3 — 6021 of the Counties Code (55 ILCS 5/3 — 6021 (West 1998)), relating to the sheriffs authority as a conservator of the peace; section 7 — 4—8 of the Illinois Municipal Code (65 ILCS 5/7 — 4—8 (West 1998)), relating to the authority of municipal police; section 18 — 5…”
People ex rel. Donnelly v. City of Spring Valley, 2020 IL App (3d) 180202-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 5× “The Director of Illinois State Police then returned 65% of the seized proceeds to the SAFE unit pursuant to section 12 of the Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2010)). ¶7 The SAFE unit received $573,452.”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— 720 ILCS 550/12(a) — 2 cases
People v. A Parcel of Prop. Commonly Known as 1945 North 31st Street, Decatur, Macon Cnty., Illinois, 841 N.E.2d 928 (Ill. 2005). “” The State alleged, therefore, that the real estate was subject to forfeiture under the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12(a) (West 2002)) or the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (720 ILCS 570/ 505(a) (West 2002)).”
People v. 1996 GMC Savana Van, 2019 IL App (1st) 131658-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2019).
— 720 ILCS 550/12(a)(3) — 6 cases
People v. One 2000 Ford F-350 Pickup Truck, 788 N.E.2d 387 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “The statute, section 12 of the Cannabis Control Act (Act), provides that “all conveyances, including aircraft, vehicles or vessels,” are subject to forfeiture if they are used “to facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession, or concealment” of an amount of cannabis…”
People v. 1995 Ford Van, 809 N.E.2d 811 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “720 ILCS 550/12(a)(3), (d) (West 2002)) and therefore did not base our decision on the Act language, added in 1990, that a criminal acquittal does not bar a civil forfeiture action.”
People Ex Rel. Neal v. Ryan, 672 N.E.2d 47 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “” 720 ILCS 550/12 (West 1994). Initially, in our review, we note that the forfeiture provisions of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (see 720 ILCS 570/505 (West 1994)) are identical to those in the Cannabis Control Act.”
People v. One 1979 Chevrolet C-20 Van, 618 N.E.2d 1290 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993).
People Ex Rel. Birkett v. 1995 Pontiac Trans Am Vin 2g2fv22p5s2200525, 830 N.E.2d 876 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
— 720 ILCS 550/12(a)(4) — 3 cases
People v. Single Story House, 2012 IL App (5th) 110562 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “OPINION ¶1 In December 2007, the State filed in the circuit court of Randolph County a complaint for forfeiture, pursuant to the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2006)), of a single-story house at 9972 Surman Lane in Chester, Illinois.”
People v. One 2000 Ford F-350 Pickup Truck, 788 N.E.2d 387 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “The statute, section 12 of the Cannabis Control Act (Act), provides that “all conveyances, including aircraft, vehicles or vessels,” are subject to forfeiture if they are used “to facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession, or concealment” of an amount of cannabis…”
People v. $940 United States Currency, 2019 IL App (3d) 180102 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
— 720 ILCS 550/12(a)(5) — 3 cases
People v. $174,980 United States Currency, 2013 IL App (1st) 122480 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). “BACKGROUND ¶3 On September 13, 2011, the State filed a civil complaint for the forfeiture of the currency, pursuant to the relevant forfeiture provisions of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (720 ILCS 570/505(a)(5) (West 2010)), the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS…”
People v. Single Story House, 2012 IL App (5th) 110562 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “OPINION ¶1 In December 2007, the State filed in the circuit court of Randolph County a complaint for forfeiture, pursuant to the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2006)), of a single-story house at 9972 Surman Lane in Chester, Illinois.”
People v. $35,315.00 United States Currency, 2016 IL App (4th) 150685 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016).
— 720 ILCS 550/12(a)(6) — 2 cases
People v. Single Story House, 2012 IL App (5th) 110562 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “OPINION ¶1 In December 2007, the State filed in the circuit court of Randolph County a complaint for forfeiture, pursuant to the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2006)), of a single-story house at 9972 Surman Lane in Chester, Illinois.”
People v. Residence at 1303 Roncevalles Avenue, 2025 IL App (4th) 250139-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2025).
— 720 ILCS 550/12(c) — 2 cases
People v. One 2000 Ford F-350 Pickup Truck, 788 N.E.2d 387 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “The statute, section 12 of the Cannabis Control Act (Act), provides that “all conveyances, including aircraft, vehicles or vessels,” are subject to forfeiture if they are used “to facilitate the transportation, sale, receipt, possession, or concealment” of an amount of cannabis…”
People v. One 1979 Chevrolet C-20 Van, 618 N.E.2d 1290 (Ill. App. Ct. 1993).
— 720 ILCS 550/12(d) — 2 cases
People v. Keys, 756 N.E.2d 414 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
People ex rel. Donnelly v. City of Spring Valley, 2020 IL App (3d) 180202-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “The Director of Illinois State Police then returned 65% of the seized proceeds to the SAFE unit pursuant to section 12 of the Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2010)). ¶7 The SAFE unit received $573,452.”
— 720 ILCS 550/12(f) — 1 case
People v. Single Story House, 2012 IL App (5th) 110562 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “OPINION ¶1 In December 2007, the State filed in the circuit court of Randolph County a complaint for forfeiture, pursuant to the Cannabis Control Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2006)), of a single-story house at 9972 Surman Lane in Chester, Illinois.”
— 720 ILCS 550/12(g) — 2 cases
People Ex Rel. Neal v. Ryan, 672 N.E.2d 47 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “” 720 ILCS 550/12 (West 1994). Initially, in our review, we note that the forfeiture provisions of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act (see 720 ILCS 570/505 (West 1994)) are identical to those in the Cannabis Control Act.”
People ex rel. Donnelly v. City of Spring Valley, 2020 IL App (3d) 180202-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “The Director of Illinois State Police then returned 65% of the seized proceeds to the SAFE unit pursuant to section 12 of the Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2010)). ¶7 The SAFE unit received $573,452.”
— 720 ILCS 550/12(g)(1) — 1 case
People ex rel. Donnelly v. City of Spring Valley, 2020 IL App (3d) 180202-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “The Director of Illinois State Police then returned 65% of the seized proceeds to the SAFE unit pursuant to section 12 of the Act (720 ILCS 550/12 (West 2010)). ¶7 The SAFE unit received $573,452.”
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.