Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 5/115-16 (2026)

Witness disqualification

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/115-16)
    Sec. 115-16. Witness disqualification. No person shall be disqualified as a witness in a criminal case or proceeding by reason of his or her interest in the event of the case or proceeding, as a party or otherwise, or by reason of his or her having been convicted of a crime; but the interest or conviction may be shown for the purpose of affecting the credibility of the witness. A defendant in a criminal case or proceeding shall only at his or her own request be deemed a competent witness, and the person's neglect to testify shall not create a presumption against the person, nor shall the court permit a reference or comment to be made to or upon that neglect.
    In criminal cases, husband and wife may testify for or against each other. Neither, however, may testify as to any communication or admission made by either of them to the other or as to any conversation between them during marriage, except in cases in which either is charged with an offense against the person or property of the other, in case of spouse abandonment, when the interests of their child or children or of any child or children in either spouse's care, custody, or control are directly involved, when either is charged with or under investigation for an offense under Section 11-1.20, 11-1.30, 11-1.40, 11-1.50, 11-1.60, 12-13, 12-14, 12-14.1, 12-15, or 12-16 of the Criminal Code of 1961 or the Criminal Code of 2012 and the victim is a minor under 18 years of age in either spouse's care, custody, or control at the time of the offense, or as to matters in which either has acted as agent of the other.
(Source: P.A. 96-1242, eff. 7-23-10; 96-1551, eff. 7-1-11; 97-1150, eff. 1-25-13.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1996–2025 · leading case: People v. Naylor, 893 N.E.2d 653 (Ill. 2008).
People v. Naylor, 893 N.E.2d 653 (Ill. 2008). · cites it 2× “Laws 183 )), and in criminal cases by section 115-16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2006) (originally enacted at Ill.”
People v. Gliniewicz, 2018 IL App (2d) 170490 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 3× “3d 141 , and section 115-16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) ( 725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2016) (witness disqualification) ) *32 *652 for the propositions that the marital-communication privilege has a long common-law history and was recognized to "promote marital…”
People v. Bannister, 902 N.E.2d 571 (Ill. 2008). “2d 658 *594 (1989) (collecting cases); 725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2006) (prohibiting comment on criminal defendant's failure to testify).”
People v. Carr-McKnight, 2020 IL App (1st) 163245 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “¶ 87 Section 115-16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2010)) contains Illinois’s marital privilege law.”
People v. Lindsey, 771 N.E.2d 399 (Ill. 2002). “See 725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2000) (in a criminal case or proceeding, a defendant's "neglect to testify shall not create a presumption against [him]").”
People v. Trzeciak, 2013 IL 114491 (Ill. 2014). · cites it 4× “The appellate court, with one justice dissenting, reversed defendant’s conviction, holding that a threat made by defendant to his wife, Laura Nilsen, that he would kill her and Kasavich, was inadmissable under Illinois’ marital privilege, section 115-16 of the Code of Criminal…”
People v. Miller, 771 N.E.2d 386 (Ill. 2002). “See 725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2000) (in a criminal case or proceeding, a defendant's "neglect to testify shall not create a presumption against [him]").”
People v. Swank, 800 N.E.2d 864 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “"A defendant in a criminal case or proceeding shall only at his or her own request be deemed a competent witness, and the person's neglect to testify shall not create a presumption against the person, nor shall the court permit a reference or comment to be made to or upon that…”
People v. Trzeciak, 2013 IL 114491 (Ill. 2014). · cites it 2× “The appellate court, with one justice dissenting, reversed defendant’s conviction, holding that a threat made by defendant to his wife, Laura Nilsen, that he would kill her and Kasavich, was inadmissable under Illinois’ marital privilege, section 115-16 of the Code of Criminal…”
People v. Garner, 2016 IL App (1st) 141583 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 3× “” 725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2014). ¶ 39 As noted above, the trial court denied defendant’s motion in limine on the basis that the conversations at issue fell within the statutory exception applicable “when the interests of their child or children or of any child or children in…”
People v. Gliniewicz, 2020 IL App (2d) 190412 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “The State also repeated its argument that the admissibility of the communications should be considered under the marital privilege and not under section 115-16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2016)), which generally bars spouses from…”
People v. Garner, 2016 IL App (1st) 141583 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 3× “” 725 ILCS 5/115-16 (West 2014). ¶ 38 As noted above, the trial court denied defendant’s motion in limine on the basis that the conversations at issue fell within the statutory exception applicable “when the interests of their child or children or of any child or children in…”
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.