725 ILCS 5/111-3
Form of charge
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/111-3)
(from Ch. 38, par. 111-3)
Sec. 111-3. Form of charge.
(a) A charge shall be in writing and allege the commission of an
offense by:
(1) Stating the name of the offense;
(2) Citing the statutory provision alleged to have | been violated; |
(3) Setting forth the nature and elements of the | offense charged; |
(4) Stating the date and county of the offense as | definitely as can be done; and |
(5) Stating the name of the accused, if known, and if | not known, designate the accused by any name or description by which he can be identified with reasonable certainty. |
(a-5) If the victim is alleged to have been subjected to an offense involving an illegal sexual act including, but not limited to, a sexual offense defined in Article 11 or Section 10-9 of the Criminal Code of 2012, the charge shall state the identity of the victim by name, initials, or description. (b) An indictment shall be signed by the foreman of the Grand Jury and
an information shall be signed by the State's Attorney and sworn to by him
or another. A complaint shall be sworn to and signed by the complainant; provided, that when a peace officer observes the commission of a misdemeanor
and is the complaining witness, the signing of the complaint by the peace
officer is sufficient to charge the defendant with the commission of the
offense, and the complaint need not be sworn to if the officer signing the
complaint certifies that the statements set forth in the complaint are true and
correct and are subject to the penalties provided by law for false
certification
under Section 1-109 of the Code of Civil Procedure and perjury under Section
32-2 of the Criminal Code of 2012; and further provided, however, that when a citation is issued on a Uniform Traffic
Ticket or Uniform Conservation Ticket (in a form prescribed by the
Conference of Chief Circuit Judges and filed with the Supreme Court), the
copy of such Uniform Ticket which is filed with the circuit court
constitutes a complaint to which the defendant may plead, unless he
specifically requests that a verified complaint be filed.
(c) When the State seeks an enhanced sentence because of a prior
conviction, the charge shall also state the intention to seek an enhanced
sentence and shall state such prior conviction so as to give notice to the
defendant. However, the fact of such prior conviction and the State's
intention to seek an enhanced sentence are not elements of the offense and
may not be disclosed to the jury during trial unless otherwise permitted by
issues properly raised during such trial.
For the purposes of this Section, "enhanced sentence" means a sentence
which is increased by a prior conviction from one classification of offense
to another higher level classification of offense set forth in Section
5-4.5-10
of the Unified Code of CorrectionsNotes of Decisions
Cited in 286
cases (90 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: People v. Owens
People v. Owens (2016)
“The Illinois legislature has since codified the Apprendi rule in section 111-3(c-5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Procedure Code) (725 ILCS 5/111-3(c-5) (West 2012)). Section 111-3(c-5) of the Procedure Code provides: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in…”
People v. Davis (2007)
“Nothing in this subsection (c-5) requires the imposition of a sentence that increases the range of penalties for the offense beyond the statutory maximum that could otherwise be imposed for the offense if the imposition of that sentence is not required by law.”
People v. Ross (2009)
“” 725 ILCS 5/111-3 (West 2006). An indictment must be signed by the foreman of the grand jury.”
People v. Nowells (2014)
“” 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a) (West 2010). ¶ 24 Here, the charging instrument read, in pertinent part: “The State’s Attorney of Cook County now appears before the Circuit Court of Cook County and in the name and by the authority of the People of the State of Illinois states that on or…”
People v. Van Schoyck (2009)
“" 725 ILCS 5/111-3(b) (West 2002). Subsection (c) of section 111-3 governs how the State is to seek enhanced sentences for offenses and provides in relevant part: "When the State seeks an enhanced sentence because of a prior conviction, the charge shall also state the intention…”
People v. O'QUINN (2003)
“February 23, 2001 (amending 725 ILCS 5/111-3 (West 1998)). The section now requires that the State shall provide written notice whenever a fact, other than a prior conviction, which is not an element of the offense will be used to seek an increased range of penalties.”
People v. Crutchfield (2004)
“On remand, on March 22, 2002, the State filed a "Notice of Intent to Seek Aggravating Factor" pursuant to section 111-3(c-5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/111-3(c-5) (West 2002)). In the notice, the State asserted that it would present evidence to the…”
People v. Espinoza (2016)
“OPINION ¶1 At issue in this case is whether a charging instrument that identifies the victim simply as “a minor” is sufficient pursuant to section 111-3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/111-3 (West 2012)). In two separate criminal cases, the trial…”
People v. Pryor (2014)
“725 ILCS 5/111-3 (West 2010). ¶ 35 Section 111-3 is entitled “Form of charge” and it proscribes what a charging instrument must state.”
People v. Jones (2016)
“23, 2001) (adding 725 ILCS 5/111-3(c-5))) in response to the decision in Apprendi.”
People v. DiPace (2004)
“However, "[w]hen the State seeks an enhanced sentence because of a prior conviction," "the fact of such prior conviction * * * [is] not [an] element[ ] of the offense * * *.”
Fernandez v. Mukasey (2008)
“, a possession offense with a recidivist elementdoes not currently exist in Illinois.”
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a) — 77 cases
People v. Okoro (2022)
People v. Nowells (2014)
“” 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a) (West 2010). ¶ 24 Here, the charging instrument read, in pertinent part: “The State’s Attorney of Cook County now appears before the Circuit Court of Cook County and in the name and by the authority of the People of the State of Illinois states that on or…”
People v. Montanez (2023)
People v. Avendano (2023)
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a)(1) — 3 cases
People v. Arrendondo (2023)
People v. Klimek (2023)
People v. Edwards (2021)
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a)(2) — 5 cases
People v. Shipp (2011)
People v. Bootchee (2021)
People v. Shipp (2011)
People v. Edwards (2021)
People v. Gonzalez (2022)
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a)(3) — 19 cases
People v. Grever (2004)
People v. Adams (1994)
People v. Stevenson (2014)
People v. Fields (2015)
People v. Swift (2017)
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a)(4) — 8 cases
People v. Adams (2023)
People v. Carter (2022)
People v. Kotero (2012)
People v. Bonnette (2025)
People v. Guerrero (2005)
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a)(5)(c) — 2 cases
People v. Ross (2009)
“” 725 ILCS 5/111-3 (West 2006). An indictment must be signed by the foreman of the grand jury.”
People v. Ross (2009)
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(b) — 14 cases
People v. Van Schoyck (2009)
“" 725 ILCS 5/111-3(b) (West 2002). Subsection (c) of section 111-3 governs how the State is to seek enhanced sentences for offenses and provides in relevant part: "When the State seeks an enhanced sentence because of a prior conviction, the charge shall also state the intention…”
People v. McDuffee (1998)
People v. Thomas (2014)
People v. Cotledge (2022)
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(c) — 81 cases
People v. Owens (2016)
“The Illinois legislature has since codified the Apprendi rule in section 111-3(c-5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Procedure Code) (725 ILCS 5/111-3(c-5) (West 2012)). Section 111-3(c-5) of the Procedure Code provides: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in…”
People v. Davis (2007)
“Nothing in this subsection (c-5) requires the imposition of a sentence that increases the range of penalties for the offense beyond the statutory maximum that could otherwise be imposed for the offense if the imposition of that sentence is not required by law.”
People v. Van Schoyck (2009)
“" 725 ILCS 5/111-3(b) (West 2002). Subsection (c) of section 111-3 governs how the State is to seek enhanced sentences for offenses and provides in relevant part: "When the State seeks an enhanced sentence because of a prior conviction, the charge shall also state the intention…”
People v. Nowells (2014)
“” 725 ILCS 5/111-3(a) (West 2010). ¶ 24 Here, the charging instrument read, in pertinent part: “The State’s Attorney of Cook County now appears before the Circuit Court of Cook County and in the name and by the authority of the People of the State of Illinois states that on or…”
People v. Pryor (2014)
“725 ILCS 5/111-3 (West 2010). ¶ 35 Section 111-3 is entitled “Form of charge” and it proscribes what a charging instrument must state.”
— 725 ILCS 5/111-3(d) — 3 cases
People v. Davis (2007)
“Nothing in this subsection (c-5) requires the imposition of a sentence that increases the range of penalties for the offense beyond the statutory maximum that could otherwise be imposed for the offense if the imposition of that sentence is not required by law.”
People v. Guillen (2014)
People v. Davis (2007)
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.