ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (2026)

(Repealed)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/115-10.6)
    Sec. 115-10.6. (Repealed).
(Source: P.A. 97-1150, eff. 1-25-13. Repealed by P.A. 99-243, eff. 8-3-15.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2011–2021 · leading case: People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2017). · cites it 3× “" 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008). ¶ 18 The State also sought admission of Kathleen's and Stacy's hearsay statements under the common-law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, referenced in subsection (g) of the statute ( 725 ILCS 5/115-10.”
People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 5× “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2010)), which provides a hearsay exception for intentional murder of a witness.”
People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 6× “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Turner, 2018 IL App (1st) 170204 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “¶ 17 (quoting 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(a) (West 2008) ). Among other requirements, that provision allowed admission of such statements only if the court found that "the adverse party murdered the declarant and that the murder was intended to cause the unavailability of the declarant…”
People v. Perkins, 2018 IL App (1st) 133981 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “725 ILCS 5/115-10.6, 10.7 (West 2012). 1 We remanded for a determination, pursuant to Illinois Rule of Evidence 804(b)(5) (eff.”
People v. Perkins, 2018 IL App (1st) 133981 (Ill. App. Ct. 2021). “725 ILCS 5/115-10.6, 115-10.7 (West 2012).”
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2018). · cites it 2× “” 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(e)(2) (West 2008). This court has held, however, that a defendant forfeits his ability to challenge the reliability of the declarant’s statements by the very act of preventing the declarant from testifying.”
People v. Turner, 2018 IL App (1st) 170204 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “” 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(e)(2) (West 2008). ¶ 71 The supreme court in Peterson recognized that “where an irreconcilable conflict exists between a legislative enactment and a rule of [the supreme] court on a matter within the court’s authority, the rule will prevail.”
People v. Peterson, 952 N.E.2d 691 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 9× “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 2011 IL App (3d) 100513 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 8× “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2018). · cites it 2× “” 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008). ¶ 18 The State also sought admission of Kathleen’s and Stacy’s hearsay statements under the common-law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, referenced in subsection (g) of the statute (725 ILCS 5/115-10.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(a) — 5 cases
People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2010)), which provides a hearsay exception for intentional murder of a witness.”
People v. Turner, 2018 IL App (1st) 170204 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “¶ 17 (quoting 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(a) (West 2008) ). Among other requirements, that provision allowed admission of such statements only if the court found that "the adverse party murdered the declarant and that the murder was intended to cause the unavailability of the declarant…”
People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 952 N.E.2d 691 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 2011 IL App (3d) 100513 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(e) — 4 cases
People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2010)), which provides a hearsay exception for intentional murder of a witness.”
People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 952 N.E.2d 691 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 2011 IL App (3d) 100513 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(e)(2) — 6 cases
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2017). “" 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008). ¶ 18 The State also sought admission of Kathleen's and Stacy's hearsay statements under the common-law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, referenced in subsection (g) of the statute ( 725 ILCS 5/115-10.”
People v. Turner, 2018 IL App (1st) 170204 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “¶ 17 (quoting 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(a) (West 2008) ). Among other requirements, that provision allowed admission of such statements only if the court found that "the adverse party murdered the declarant and that the murder was intended to cause the unavailability of the declarant…”
People v. Turner, 2018 IL App (1st) 170204 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “” 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(e)(2) (West 2008). ¶ 71 The supreme court in Peterson recognized that “where an irreconcilable conflict exists between a legislative enactment and a rule of [the supreme] court on a matter within the court’s authority, the rule will prevail.”
People v. Peterson, 2012 IL App (3d) 100514-B (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2018). “” 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(e)(2) (West 2008). This court has held, however, that a defendant forfeits his ability to challenge the reliability of the declarant’s statements by the very act of preventing the declarant from testifying.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(f) — 2 cases
People v. Peterson, 952 N.E.2d 691 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 2011 IL App (3d) 100513 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(g) — 6 cases
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2017). “" 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008). ¶ 18 The State also sought admission of Kathleen's and Stacy's hearsay statements under the common-law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, referenced in subsection (g) of the statute ( 725 ILCS 5/115-10.”
People v. Coleman, 2014 IL App (5th) 110274 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2010)), which provides a hearsay exception for intentional murder of a witness.”
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2018). “” 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6(e)(2) (West 2008). This court has held, however, that a defendant forfeits his ability to challenge the reliability of the declarant’s statements by the very act of preventing the declarant from testifying.”
People v. Peterson, 952 N.E.2d 691 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008) (hearsay exception for the intentional murder of a witness)) and under the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.”
People v. Peterson, 2017 IL 120331 (Ill. 2018). “” 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 (West 2008). ¶ 18 The State also sought admission of Kathleen’s and Stacy’s hearsay statements under the common-law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, referenced in subsection (g) of the statute (725 ILCS 5/115-10.”
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.