ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 5/115-12 (2026)

Substantive Admissibility of Prior Identification

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/115-12) (from Ch. 38, par. 115-12)
    Sec. 115-12. Substantive Admissibility of Prior Identification. A statement is not rendered inadmissible by the hearsay rule if (a) the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing, and (b) the declarant is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement, and (c) the statement is one of identification of a person made after perceiving him.
(Source: P.A. 83-367.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 63 cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: People v. Thorne, 817 N.E.2d 1163 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Thorne, 817 N.E.2d 1163 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 4× “After extensive argument as to the admissibility of the testimony pursuant to section 115-12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 1998)), the court overruled the objection.”
People v. Williams, 739 N.E.2d 455 (Ill. 2000). · cites it 2× “According to defendant, this evidence was admissible substantively under section 115-12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 1994)), which provides in relevant part: "A statement is not rendered inadmissible by the hearsay rule if (a) the declarant…”
People v. Tisdel, 775 N.E.2d 921 (Ill. 2002). · cites it 2× “The court in Hayes relied upon this court's prior decision in Rogers , wherein the rationale for this exception was explained: "[B]y the time of trial, the witness' mind has become so conditioned that there is little likelihood that he would not identify the person [defendant]…”
People v. Newbill, 873 N.E.2d 408 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 3× “See 725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 2004). Though this specific argument was not raised before the trial court, an appellee may raise any argument in support of the trial court's judgment, provided they have a sufficient factual basis before the trial court.”
People v. Emerson, 727 N.E.2d 302 (Ill. 2000). · cites it 2× “According to this provision: "A statement is not rendered inadmissible by the hearsay rule if (a) the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing, and (b) the declarant is subject to cross-examination concerning the statement, and (c) the statement is one of identification of a…”
People v. Rodriguez, 728 N.E.2d 695 (Ill. App. Ct. 2000). · cites it 2× “See also 725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 1996). Here, Bolton testified that he previously identified defendant from both the photo array and the lineup, and the veracity of this testimony was tested on cross-examination.”
People v. Zimmerman, 2018 IL App (4th) 170695 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 2× “The State's Motion in Limine To Admit Statements of Identification ¶ 24 In May 2017, the State filed a motion in limine to admit statements of identification pursuant to section 115-12 of the Code ( 725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 2016) ) and Illinois Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) (eff.”
People v. Holliday, 2020 IL App (5th) 160547 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “” 725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 2016). ¶ 63 In Temple, 2014 IL App (1st) 111653, ¶ 1 , the defendant contended that the trial court erred by admitting prior consistent statements of witnesses.”
People v. Zimmerman, 2018 IL App (4th) 170695 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 3× “The State later filed two motions in limine that sought to (1) introduce identification testimony pursuant to section 115-12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 2016)) and Illinois Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1) (eff.”
People v. Faber, 2012 IL App (1st) 93273 (Ill. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 2× “He argues that section 115-12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 2008)) permits such testimony from a third party even if the declarant did not testify about his or her out-of-court identification.”
People v. Neal, 2020 IL App (2d) 170356 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “725 ILCS 5/115-12 (West 2016); Ill. R. Evid.”
People v. Myers, 2023 IL App (1st) 210642 (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). · cites it 2× “¶ 61 Presumably acknowledging that the statements were inadmissible as a prior inconsistent statement or as impeachment, the State contends that the witnesses’ prior statements identifying defendant as “Polaco” and stating that he tried to sell them a gold bracelet were instead…”
Show all 63 citing cases →
— 725 ILCS 5/115-12(b) — 1 case
People v. Stackhouse (Ill. App. Ct. 2004).
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.