ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 5/114-11 (2026)

Motion to Suppress Confession

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/114-11) (from Ch. 38, par. 114-11)
    Sec. 114-11. Motion to Suppress Confession.
    (a) Prior to the trial of any criminal case a defendant may move to suppress as evidence any confession given by him on the ground that it was not voluntary.
    (b) The motion shall be in writing and state facts showing wherein the confession is involuntary.
    (c) If the allegations of the motion state facts which, if true, show that the confession was not voluntarily made the court shall conduct a hearing into the merits of the motion.
    (d) The burden of going forward with the evidence and the burden of proving that a confession was voluntary shall be on the State. Objection to the failure of the State to call all material witnesses on the issue of whether the confession was voluntary must be made in the trial court.
    (e) The motion shall be made only before a court with jurisdiction to try the offense.
    (f) The issue of the admissibility of the confession shall not be submitted to the jury. The circumstances surrounding the making of the confession may be submitted to the jury as bearing upon the credibility or the weight to be given to the confession.
    (g) The motion shall be made before trial unless opportunity therefor did not exist or the defendant was not aware of the grounds for the motion. If the motion is made during trial, and the court determines that the motion is not untimely, and the court conducts a hearing on the merits and enters an order suppressing the confession, the court shall terminate the trial with respect to every defendant who was a party to the hearing and who was within the scope of the order of suppression, without further proceedings, unless the State files a written notice that there will be no interlocutory appeal from such order of suppression. In the event of such termination, the court shall proceed with the trial of other defendants not thus affected. Such termination of trial shall be proper and shall not bar subsequent prosecution of the identical charges and defendants; however, if after such termination the State fails to prosecute the interlocutory appeal until a determination of the merits of the appeal by the reviewing court, the termination shall be improper within the meaning of subparagraph (a) (3) of Section 3-4 of the Criminal Code of 2012 and subsequent prosecution of such defendants upon such charges shall be barred.
(Source: P.A. 97-1150, eff. 1-25-13.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 61 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: People v.Salamon, 2022 IL 125722 (Ill. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v.Salamon, 2022 IL 125722 (Ill. 2022). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2010); Richardson, 234 Ill.”
People v. Utley, 2019 IL App (1st) 152112 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 492, 505 (2003) (citing 725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2000)). “The concept of voluntariness includes proof that the defendant made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his privilege against self-incrimination and his right to counsel.”
People v. Johnson, 898 N.E.2d 658 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “" 725 ILCS 5/114-11 (f) (West 2006). Thus, even though the trial judge in the case at bar ruled that the confession was admissible, defendant still had the right to argue to the jury that the confession was unreliable and untruthful and to present evidence to that effect.”
People v. Lozano, 2022 IL App (1st) 182170 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). · cites it 2× “725 ILCS 5/114-11(a), (g) (West 2018); see also People v.”
People v. Sims, 736 N.E.2d 1048 (Ill. 2000). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 1998); People v.”
People v. Muhammad, 2023 IL App (1st) 220372 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). · cites it 3× “” 725 ILCS 5/114-11 (West 2020). Section 5/114-11 provides that “[p]rior to the trial of any criminal case a defendant may move to suppress as evidence any confession given by him on the ground that it was not voluntary,” and employs “confession” repeatedly in the statute.”
People v. Loewenstein, 883 N.E.2d 690 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 3× “Section 114-11 speaks of the voluntariness of a confession (725 ILCS 5/114-11 (West 2006)), and, therefore, at first glance, the statute might seem inapplicable.”
People v. Wilson, 2020 IL App (1st) 162430 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2012). If the State makes a prima facie showing that the statement was voluntary, it meets that burden, and the burden then shifts to the defendant to produce some evidence that the statement was involuntary.”
People v. Coleman, 2021 IL App (1st) 172416 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). · cites it 2× “1-17-2416 Act at issue in Addison Insurance, the operative statute here 725 ILCS 5/114-11 (West 2010)) does not support the application of an abuse of discretion standard.”
People v. Harris, 2012 IL App (1st) 100678 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “2d 233 , 254 -13- (2009) (discussing burden shifting under section 114-11 (725 ILCS 5/114-11 (West 2008)); burden of proving a confession voluntary is on the State).”
People v. Matute, 2020 IL App (2d) 170786 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2018). The concept of voluntariness includes proof that the defendant made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his privilege against self-incrimination and his right to counsel.”
People v. Garcia-cordova, 963 N.E.2d 355 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “2d 56 (1998) (stating that the issue of the credibility of the confession is an issue for the jury and evidence weighing on the credibility of the confession may be presented); see also 725 ILCS 5/114-11(f) (West 2006) ("The circumstances surrounding the making of the confession…”
Show all 61 citing cases →
— 725 ILCS 5/114-11(a) — 8 cases
People v. Lozano, 2022 IL App (1st) 182170 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(a), (g) (West 2018); see also People v.”
People v. Mrdjenovich, 2023 IL App (1st) 191699 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023).
People v. Trutenko, 2024 IL App (1st) 232333 (Ill. App. Ct. 2024).
People v. Shields, 2020 IL App (1st) 170107-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
People v. Meyers, 2022 IL App (4th) 210627-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
— 725 ILCS 5/114-11(c) — 1 case
People v. Petak, 2024 IL App (5th) 220641-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2024).
— 725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) — 26 cases
People v.Salamon, 2022 IL 125722 (Ill. 2022). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2010); Richardson, 234 Ill.”
People v. Utley, 2019 IL App (1st) 152112 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). “2d 492, 505 (2003) (citing 725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2000)). “The concept of voluntariness includes proof that the defendant made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his privilege against self-incrimination and his right to counsel.”
People v. Sims, 736 N.E.2d 1048 (Ill. 2000). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 1998); People v.”
People v. Wilson, 2020 IL App (1st) 162430 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2012). If the State makes a prima facie showing that the statement was voluntary, it meets that burden, and the burden then shifts to the defendant to produce some evidence that the statement was involuntary.”
People v. Matute, 2020 IL App (2d) 170786 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(d) (West 2018). The concept of voluntariness includes proof that the defendant made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his privilege against self-incrimination and his right to counsel.”
— 725 ILCS 5/114-11(f) — 5 cases
People v. Garcia-cordova, 963 N.E.2d 355 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “2d 56 (1998) (stating that the issue of the credibility of the confession is an issue for the jury and evidence weighing on the credibility of the confession may be presented); see also 725 ILCS 5/114-11(f) (West 2006) ("The circumstances surrounding the making of the confession…”
People v. Jefferson, 705 N.E.2d 56 (Ill. 1998).
People v. James, 2017 IL App (1st) 143391 (Ill. App. Ct. 2017).
People v. James, 2017 IL App (1st) 143391 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018).
People v. Garcia-Cordova, 2011 IL App (2d) 070550-B (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
— 725 ILCS 5/114-11(g) — 5 cases
People v. Lozano, 2022 IL App (1st) 182170 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “725 ILCS 5/114-11(a), (g) (West 2018); see also People v.”
People v. Hill, 2012 IL App (1st) 102028 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012).
In re D.B., 2021 IL App (3d) 200425-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2021).
People v. Tyler, 2023 IL App (1st) 181821-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2023).
People v. Causey (Ill. App. Ct. 2003).
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.