ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 205
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 205/4 (2026)

After the filing of the petition, the court shall appoint two qualified evaluators to make a personal examination of the alleged sexually dangerous person, to ascertain whether the person is sexually dangerous, and the evaluators shall file with the court a report in writing of the result of their examination, a copy of which shall be delivered to the respondent

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 205/4) (from Ch. 38, par. 105-4)
    Sec. 4. After the filing of the petition, the court shall appoint two qualified evaluators to make a personal examination of the alleged sexually dangerous person, to ascertain whether the person is sexually dangerous, and the evaluators shall file with the court a report in writing of the result of their examination, a copy of which shall be delivered to the respondent.
(Source: P.A. 98-88, eff. 7-15-13.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2023 · leading case: People v. Trainor, 752 N.E.2d 1055 (Ill. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Trainor, 752 N.E.2d 1055 (Ill. 2001). · cites it 5× “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 1998). While the question of whether an individual is a sexually dangerous person is one of fact, it is one which, by its nature, cannot be answered by a court or jury without hearing the opinions of people who have a special knowledge in the field of mental…”
People v. Burns, 809 N.E.2d 107 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 3× “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 2000). A sexually dangerous person is defined as a person who has suffered from a mental disorder for a period of not less than one year, who has criminal propensities to the commission of sex offenses, and who has demonstrated propensities toward acts of…”
People v. Lawton, 818 N.E.2d 326 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 2× “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 2002). In the case before us, the court appointed Dr.”
People v. Holmes, 2016 IL App (1st) 132357 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 2010). A copy of the report must be given to the defendant.”
People v. McVeay, 706 N.E.2d 539 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 3× “See 725 ILCS 205/4 (West 1996). At a hearing on September 9, 1996, defense counsel orally requested the appointment of a forensic psychiatrist to examine defendant.”
People v. Bailey, 937 N.E.2d 731 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 2× “As required by the Act (725 ILCS 205/4 (West 2008)), the trial court ordered that defendant be evaluated by two psychologists with regards to the petition.”
People v. Antoine, 676 N.E.2d 1374 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997). · cites it 2× “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 1994). The trial court appointed psychiatrists Joseph Bohlen and Lawrence Jeckel to examine defendant.”
People v. Hancock, 771 N.E.2d 459 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). “See 725 ILCS 205/4 (West 2000). On June 11, 2001, the State informed the trial court that it was going to proceed on the petition to have respondent declared a sexually dangerous person and not proceed on the pending criminal charges.”
People v. Grant, 2016 IL 119162 (Ill. 2016). “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 2012). The respondent has a right to demand a jury trial and be represented by counsel.”
People v. Craig, 934 N.E.2d 657 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010). “On October 28, 1998, the circuit court appointed two qualified psychiatrists and directed each, independently, to evaluate respondent for purposes of determining whether he was a sexually dangerous person pursuant to section 4 of the Act (725 ILCS 205/4 (West 1998)). On January…”
People v. Bramlett, 767 N.E.2d 961 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 2× “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 1998). The examining psychiatrists must then file a report with the court containing the results of their examination.”
People v. Spurlock, 903 N.E.2d 874 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009). “725 ILCS 205/4 (West 2006). Accordingly, no matter how diligent, the State cannot always be ready for a hearing under the Act within the 120-day speedy trial time limit.”
Show all 34 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.