ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 5/104-12 (2026)

Right to Jury

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/104-12) (from Ch. 38, par. 104-12)
    Sec. 104-12. Right to Jury.) The issue of the defendant's fitness may be determined in the first instance by the court or by a jury. The defense or the State may demand a jury or the court on its own motion may order a jury. However, when the issue is raised after trial has begun or after conviction but before sentencing, or when the issue is to be redetermined under Section 104-20 or 104-27, the issue shall be determined by the court.
(Source: P.A. 81-1217.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: People v. Haynes, 673 N.E.2d 318 (Ill. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Haynes, 673 N.E.2d 318 (Ill. 1996). · cites it 2× “The defense or the State may demand a jury or the court on its own motion may order a jury.”
People v. Scott, 742 N.E.2d 287 (Ill. 2000). “Unlike statutes that specifically grant a defendant a right to a jury determination at certain proceedings, such as a capital sentencing hearing (720 ILCS 5/9-1(d) (West 1996)) or a fitness hearing (725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 1996)), the Post-Conviction Hearing Act makes no…”
People v. Holt, 2013 IL App (2d) 120476 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). “725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2012). Pursuant to section 104-11(c) of the Code (725 ILCS 5/104-11(c) (West 2012)), “[w]hen a bona fide doubt of the defendant’s fitness has been raised, the burden of proving that the defendant is fit by a preponderance of the evidence and the burden of…”
People v. Wilber, 2018 IL App (2d) 170328 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2016). People v. Speck, 41 Ill.”
People v. Wilber, 2018 IL App (2d) 170328 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2016). People v. Speck, 41 Ill.”
People v. McCoy, 2014 IL App (2d) 130632 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “He contends that the trial court erred by disregarding his demand for a jury determination of fitness under section 104-12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2012)). Because a defendant has a statutory right to demand a jury determination…”
People v. Miraglia, 2013 IL App (1st) 120286 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 2× “” 725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2004). ¶ 23 Whether the defendant was entitled to a jury trial on the issue of fitness is a question of statutory interpretation subject to de novo review.”
People v. Miraglia, 2013 IL App (1st) 120286 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013). “" 725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2004). ¶ 23 Whether the defendant was entitled to a jury trial on the issue of fitness is a question of statutory interpretation subject to de novo review.”
People v. McGuinn, 2025 IL App (1st) 231668-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “- 19 - 1-23-1668 ¶ 51 Defendant points out that he has a statutory right, independent of his counsel’s wishes, to insist upon a jury determination of his fitness (citing 725 ILCS 5/104-12 (2022)) and he was not present to make that election (citing People v.”
People v. Floyd, 2025 IL App (1st) 160406-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2025). “” 725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2014) (“The defense or the State may demand a jury or the court on its own motion may order a jury.”
People v. Hoaks, 2026 IL App (5th) 241207-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2026). “” 725 ILCS 5/104-12 (West 2022). 13 Pursuant to this statutory language, a defendant must affirmatively demand a jury.”
People v. Melka (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). “However, when the issue is raised after trial has begun or after conviction but before sentencing, or when the issue is to be redetermined under Section 104-20 or 104-27, the issue shall be determined by the court.”
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.