ILCS » Chapter 720 · Act 570
Illinois Compiled Statutes

720 ILCS 570/506 (2026)

It is not necessary for the State to negate any exemption or exception in this Act in any complaint, information, indictment or other pleading or in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding under this Act

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(720 ILCS 570/506) (from Ch. 56 1/2, par. 1506)
    Sec. 506. It is not necessary for the State to negate any exemption or exception in this Act in any complaint, information, indictment or other pleading or in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding under this Act. The burden of proof of any exemption or exception is upon the person claiming it.
(Source: P.A. 77-757.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2009–2023 · leading case: People v. Rodriguez, 926 N.E.2d 390 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Rodriguez, 926 N.E.2d 390 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 4× “However, the Act also provides that "[i]t is not necessary for the State to negate any exemption or exception in this Act in any complaint, information, indictment or other pleading or in any trial, *395 hearing, or other proceeding under this Act.”
People v. Bruemmer, 2021 IL App (4th) 190877 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “Sometimes the General Assembly expressly allocates burdens of proof for exceptions (see 720 ILCS 5/24-2(h) (West 2020); 720 ILCS 570/506 (West 2020); 720 ILCS 550/16 (West 2020)) and sometimes it does not (see 720 ILCS 5/11-1.”
People v. Kathan, 2014 IL App (2d) 121335 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 2× “(citing 720 ILCS 570/506 (West 2004)). Accordingly, the court stated that “a defendant -8- 2014 IL App (2d) 121335 charged with possession of a controlled substance must produce evidence that his possession was pursuant to a prescription, which then places the burden on the…”
People v. Cannon, 2015 IL App (3d) 130672 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “56½, ¶ 1506) (now 720 ILCS 570/506 (West 2012))); and section 16 of the Cannabis Control Act (Ill.”
People v. Kathan, 2014 IL App (2d) 121335 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 2× “(citing 720 ILCS 570/506 (West 2004)). Accordingly, the court stated that “a defendant charged with possession of a controlled substance must produce evidence that his possession was pursuant to a prescription, which then places the burden on the State to disprove the defense…”
People v. Haiman, 2018 IL App (2d) 151242 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “es and McCullough call for is not noticeably dissimilar from that used generally in deciding whether to admit evidence: does the probative value of the evidence outweigh its potential for undue prejudice? Based on these principles, we cannot say that the trial court abused its…”
People v. Jones, 2023 IL App (3d) 210350-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). “” 720 ILCS 570/506 (West 2018). The Act also provides that certain persons “may lawfully possess controlled substances under [the] Act,” including, an “ultimate user * * * under a lawful prescription of a practitioner.”
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.