ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 140
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 140/1 (2026)

Whenever any person accused of committing a felony or misdemeanor is to be tried in any court of this State, the court shall upon its own motion or that of defense or prosecution determine whether the accused is capable of understanding the English language and is capable of expressing himself in the English language so as to be understood directly by counsel, court or jury

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 140/1) (from Ch. 38, par. 165-11)
    Sec. 1. Whenever any person accused of committing a felony or misdemeanor is to be tried in any court of this State, the court shall upon its own motion or that of defense or prosecution determine whether the accused is capable of understanding the English language and is capable of expressing himself in the English language so as to be understood directly by counsel, court or jury. If the court finds the accused incapable of so understanding or so expressing himself, the court shall appoint an interpreter for the accused whom he can understand and who can understand him. In compliance with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the right to communications access through a sign language interpreter or other means shall extend to a person with a disability who is accused of a violation of any penal statute of this State.
(Source: P.A. 88-201.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: People v. Raczkowski, 834 N.E.2d 596 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Raczkowski, 834 N.E.2d 596 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 3× “See 725 ILCS 140/1 (West 2002). 2 Though the decision to appoint an interpreter is left to the trial court’s discretion (see Escalante, 256 Ill.”
People v. Resendiz, 2020 IL App (1st) 180821 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “” 725 ILCS 140/1 ( West 2016 ). Section 2 of the Interpreter Act states that the trial court “court shall enter an order of its appointment of the interpreter who shall be sworn to truly interpret or translate all questions propounded or answers given as directed by the court.”
People v. Castellano, 2020 IL App (1st) 170543 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “” 725 ILCS 140/1 (West 2018). Section 2 provides that “[t]he court shall enter an order of its appointment of the interpreter who shall be sworn to truly interpret or translate all questions propounded or answers given as directed by the court.”
People v. Marquez, 756 N.E.2d 345 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “” 725 ILCS 140/1 (West 1996). •8 Defendant was given the opportunity to have an interpreter; however, both defendant and defense counsel indicated that an interpreter was not needed.”
People v. Long, 693 N.E.2d 1260 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998). “On appeal, defendant maintains this court should reverse his conviction because his requests for a sign language interpreter were denied.”
People v. Argueta, 2015 IL App (1st) 123393 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “" 725 ILCS 140/1 (West 2008). The availability of the language assistance of an interpreter lies within the discretion of the trial court.”
People v. Cruz, 866 N.E.2d 626 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “” 725 ILCS 140/1 (West 2004). The statute does not prescribe any formal qualifications or credentials and, as defendant acknowledges, does not require that the record disclose the interpreter’s qualifications.”
People v. Argueta, 2015 IL App (1st) 123393 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “” 725 ILCS 140/1 (West 2008). The availability of the language assistance of an interpreter lies within the discretion of the trial court.”
People v. Fukama-Kabika, 2022 IL App (4th) 200371-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “” Such an argument is disingenuous at its best because, upon the representations of counsel and/or a defendant that he cannot adequately communicate in English, any reasonably experienced trial court would have been remiss in failing to appoint an interpreter. While the…”
People v. Luna, 2023 IL App (4th) 220605-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). “Section 1 of the Criminal Proceeding Interpreter Act (725 ILCS 140/1 (West 2020)) requires the court to appoint an interpreter for a defendant who is incapable of either understanding the English language or expressing himself in the English language.”
People v. Resendiz, 2020 IL App (1st) 180821 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “” 725 ILCS 140/1 ( West 2016 ). Section 2 of the Interpreter Act states that the trial court “court shall enter an order of its appointment of the interpreter who shall be sworn to truly interpret or translate all questions propounded or answers given as directed by the court.”
People v. Castellano, 2020 IL App (1st) 170543 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “” 725 ILCS 140/1 (West 2018). Section 2 provides that “[t]he court shall enter an order of its appointment of the interpreter who shall be sworn to truly interpret or translate all questions propounded or answers given as directed by the court.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
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.