ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (2026)

Admissibility of prior statements when witness refused to testify despite a court order to testify

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/115-10.2)
    Sec. 115-10.2. Admissibility of prior statements when witness refused to testify despite a court order to testify.
    (a) A statement not specifically covered by any other hearsay exception but having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is not excluded by the hearsay rule if the declarant is unavailable as defined in subsection (c) and if the court determines that:
        (1) the statement is offered as evidence of a
    
material fact; and
        (2) the statement is more probative on the point for
    
which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and
        (3) the general purposes of this Section and the
    
interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence.
    (b) A statement may not be admitted under this exception unless the proponent of it makes known to the adverse party sufficiently in advance of the trial or hearing to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent's intention to offer the statement, and the particulars of the statement, including the name and address of the declarant.
    (c) Unavailability as a witness is limited to the situation in which the declarant persists in refusing to testify concerning the subject matter of the declarant's statement despite an order of the court to do so.
    (d) A declarant is not unavailable as a witness if exemption, refusal, claim or lack of memory, inability or absence is due to the procurement or wrongdoing of the proponent of a statement for purpose of preventing the witness from attending or testifying.
    (e) Nothing in this Section shall render a prior statement inadmissible for purposes of impeachment because the statement was not recorded or otherwise fails to meet the criteria set forth in this Section.
    (f) Prior statements are admissible under this Section only if the statements were made under oath and were subject to cross-examination by the adverse party in a prior trial, hearing, or other proceeding.
(Source: P.A. 93-413, eff. 8-5-03; 93-443, eff. 8-5-03; 94-53, eff. 6-17-05.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2021 · leading case: People v. Drum, 748 N.E.2d 344 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Drum, 748 N.E.2d 344 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). · cites it 9× “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)), and the State brought an interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
People v. Wilson, 2012 IL App (1st) 101038 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 2× “1 (West 2008)) and the statute covering admissibility of prior statements when a witness refuses to testify despite a court order (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2008)). Counsel for Lorenzo objected to the statements’ admissibility under both -4- statutes, but the court found them…”
People v. Busch, 2020 IL App (2d) 180229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “2 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2016)), stating that “the guilt or innocence of the defendant relies very heavily on the admissibility or inadmissibility of those out-of-court statements.”
People v. Dixon, 721 N.E.2d 1172 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). “Laws at 3798-99) (adding 725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1996))). Two sections of Public Act 89-689 address the juvenile justice system: section 75 amends a Counties Code (55 ILCS 5/1-1001 et seq.”
People v. Edwards, 722 N.E.2d 258 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). “2 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1996)). In Sullivan , the prior testimony of the accomplices was not admitted into evidence.”
People v. Krisik, 2018 IL App (1st) 161265 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) ( 725 ILCS 5/115-10.2, 10.7 (West 2014) ). 4 ¶ 15 The State argued that in the event Ghorley failed to appear in court, despite the continuing efforts to serve her with subpoenas directing her to appear, she should be deemed…”
People v. Busch, 2020 IL App (2d) 180229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “2 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2016)), stating that “the guilt or innocence of the defendant relies very heavily on the admissibility or inadmissibility of those out-of-court statements.”
People v. Drum (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). · cites it 9× “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)), and the State brought an interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
People v. Wilson, 966 N.E.2d 1215 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 2× “1 (West 2008)) and the statute covering admissibility of prior statements when a witness refuses to testify despite a court order (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2008)). Counsel for Lorenzo objected to the statements' admissibility under both statutes, but the court found them…”
People v. Busch, 2020 IL App (2d) 180229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). · cites it 2× “2 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2016)), stating that “the guilt or innocence of the defendant relies very heavily on the admissibility or inadmissibility of those out-of-court statements.”
People v. Drum (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). · cites it 5× “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)) to admit certain hearsay statements at defendant's trial, and the State brings this interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
People v. Patterson (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 3× “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2002)), which allows into evidence the prior statements of a witness when the witness refuses to testify despite being ordered by the court to do so.”
Show all 23 citing cases →
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.2(a) — 5 cases
People v. Drum, 748 N.E.2d 344 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)), and the State brought an interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
People v. Drum (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)), and the State brought an interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
People v. Brown (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
People v. Campbell (Ill. App. Ct. 1999).
People v. Drum (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)) to admit certain hearsay statements at defendant's trial, and the State brings this interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.2(a)(1) — 1 case
People v. Patterson (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2002)), which allows into evidence the prior statements of a witness when the witness refuses to testify despite being ordered by the court to do so.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.2(c) — 8 cases
People v. Drum, 748 N.E.2d 344 (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)), and the State brought an interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
People v. Busch, 2020 IL App (2d) 180229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “2 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2016)), stating that “the guilt or innocence of the defendant relies very heavily on the admissibility or inadmissibility of those out-of-court statements.”
People v. Krisik, 2018 IL App (1st) 161265 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) ( 725 ILCS 5/115-10.2, 10.7 (West 2014) ). 4 ¶ 15 The State argued that in the event Ghorley failed to appear in court, despite the continuing efforts to serve her with subpoenas directing her to appear, she should be deemed…”
People v. Busch, 2020 IL App (2d) 180229 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “2 of the Code (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 2016)), stating that “the guilt or innocence of the defendant relies very heavily on the admissibility or inadmissibility of those out-of-court statements.”
People v. Drum (Ill. App. Ct. 2001). “2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.2 (West 1998)), and the State brought an interlocutory appeal from that order (145 Ill.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.2(f) — 1 case
People v. Gray (Ill. App. Ct. 2008).
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.