ILCS » Chapter 725 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

725 ILCS 5/115-7 (2026)

a

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(725 ILCS 5/115-7) (from Ch. 38, par. 115-7)
    Sec. 115-7. a. In prosecutions for predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual abuse, criminal sexual abuse, involuntary servitude, involuntary sexual servitude of a minor, or trafficking in persons; and in prosecutions for battery and aggravated battery, when the commission of the offense involves sexual penetration or sexual conduct as defined in Section 11-0.1 of the Criminal Code of 2012; and with the trial or retrial of the offenses formerly known as rape, deviate sexual assault, indecent liberties with a child, and aggravated indecent liberties with a child, the prior sexual activity or the reputation of the alleged victim or corroborating witness under Section 115-7.3 of this Code is inadmissible except (1) as evidence concerning the past sexual conduct of the alleged victim or corroborating witness under Section 115-7.3 of this Code with the accused when this evidence is offered by the accused upon the issue of whether the alleged victim or corroborating witness under Section 115-7.3 of this Code consented to the sexual conduct with respect to which the offense is alleged; or (2) when constitutionally required to be admitted.
    b. No evidence admissible under this Section shall be introduced unless ruled admissible by the trial judge after an offer of proof has been made at a hearing to be held in camera in order to determine whether the defense has evidence to impeach the witness in the event that prior sexual activity with the defendant is denied. Such offer of proof shall include reasonably specific information as to the date, time and place of the past sexual conduct between the alleged victim or corroborating witness under Section 115-7.3 of this Code and the defendant. Unless the court finds that reasonably specific information as to date, time or place, or some combination thereof, has been offered as to prior sexual activity with the defendant, counsel for the defendant shall be ordered to refrain from inquiring into prior sexual activity between the alleged victim or corroborating witness under Section 115-7.3 of this Code and the defendant. The court shall not admit evidence under this Section unless it determines at the hearing that the evidence is relevant and the probative value of the evidence outweighs the danger of unfair prejudice. The evidence shall be admissible at trial to the extent an order made by the court specifies the evidence that may be admitted and areas with respect to which the alleged victim or corroborating witness under Section 115-7.3 of this Code may be examined or cross examined.
(Source: P.A. 104-245, eff. 1-1-26.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 75 cases (26 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: People v. Santos, 813 N.E.2d 159 (Ill. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Santos, 813 N.E.2d 159 (Ill. 2004). · cites it 9× “The court also addressed an issue likely to recur on remand, and reversed the trial court's ruling that certain evidence must be excluded pursuant to section 115-7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 1998)), commonly known as the "rape shield"…”
People v. Maxwell, 2011 IL App (4th) 100434 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 11× “Although the court based its ruling on the rape-shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 2010)), defendant notes that subsection (a) of the statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2010)) allowed evidence of the alleged victim’s “prior sexual activity” if admission of such evidence was…”
People v. Johnson, 2020 IL App (1st) 162332 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 4× “Rape Shield Motion in Limine ¶ 11 Prior to trial, the State also filed a motion in limine pursuant to section 115-7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 2012)), commonly known as the rape shield statute, seeking to prohibit defendant from…”
People v. Patterson, 2014 IL 115102 (Ill. 2014). · cites it 5× “The Illinois Rape Shield Law ¶ 113 After reversing defendant’s convictions and remanding the cause for a new trial, the appellate court considered whether the trial court properly denied defendant’s request to introduce evidence of the victim’s sexual history under an exception…”
People v. Bates, 2018 IL App (4th) 160255 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 3× “725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2016). In response, defendant argued that semen found on A.”
People v. Cerda, 2014 IL App (1st) 120484 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). · cites it 7× “¶ 195 For all these reasons, we do not find this argument persuasive. ¶ 196 III. Evidence Barred by the Rape Shield Statute ¶ 197 Defendant also claims that the trial court erred in barring evidence pursuant to the rape shield statute.”
People v. Patterson, 2014 IL 115102 (Ill. 2015). · cites it 5× “The Illinois Rape Shield Law ¶ 113 After reversing defendant’s convictions and remanding the cause for a new trial, the appellate court considered whether the trial court properly denied defendant’s request to introduce evidence of the victim’s sexual history under an exception…”
People v. Maxwell, 961 N.E.2d 964 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 13× “Although the court based its ruling on the rape-shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 2010)), defendant notes that subsection (a) of the statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2010)) allowed evidence of the alleged victim's "prior sexual activity" if admission of such evidence was…”
People v. Pope, 2020 IL App (4th) 180773 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “¶4 Defendant appeals, arguing (1) the trial court improperly applied the rape shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 2016)), (2) the trial court erred by allowing the juvenile victims to testify in chambers with multiple support persons present, (3) the trial court gave an…”
People v. Carter, 2022 IL App (1st) 210261 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). · cites it 4× “On direct appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine and allowing the State to elicit testimony in violation of the rape shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West…”
People v. Bates, 2018 IL App (4th) 160255 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 4× “725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2016). In response, defendant argued that semen found on A.”
People v. Santos, 774 N.E.2d 473 (Ill. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 3× “The rape shield statute provides that, in prosecutions for aggravated criminal sexual *480 abuse, when the commission of the offense involves sexual penetration or sexual conduct, the prior sexual activity or the reputation of the alleged victim is inadmissible except as…”
Show all 75 citing cases →
— 725 ILCS 5/115-7(6) — 2 cases
People v. Johnson, 2014 IL App (2d) 121004 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014).
People v. Johnson, 2014 IL App (2d) 121004 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015).
— 725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) — 42 cases
People v. Santos, 813 N.E.2d 159 (Ill. 2004). “The court also addressed an issue likely to recur on remand, and reversed the trial court's ruling that certain evidence must be excluded pursuant to section 115-7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 1998)), commonly known as the "rape shield"…”
People v. Patterson, 2014 IL 115102 (Ill. 2014). “The Illinois Rape Shield Law ¶ 113 After reversing defendant’s convictions and remanding the cause for a new trial, the appellate court considered whether the trial court properly denied defendant’s request to introduce evidence of the victim’s sexual history under an exception…”
People v. Bates, 2018 IL App (4th) 160255 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2016). In response, defendant argued that semen found on A.”
People v. Johnson, 2020 IL App (1st) 162332 (Ill. App. Ct. 2020). “Rape Shield Motion in Limine ¶ 11 Prior to trial, the State also filed a motion in limine pursuant to section 115-7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Code) (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 2012)), commonly known as the rape shield statute, seeking to prohibit defendant from…”
People v. Patterson, 2014 IL 115102 (Ill. 2015). “The Illinois Rape Shield Law ¶ 113 After reversing defendant’s convictions and remanding the cause for a new trial, the appellate court considered whether the trial court properly denied defendant’s request to introduce evidence of the victim’s sexual history under an exception…”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-7(a)(1) — 3 cases
People v. Santos, 813 N.E.2d 159 (Ill. 2004). “The court also addressed an issue likely to recur on remand, and reversed the trial court's ruling that certain evidence must be excluded pursuant to section 115-7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 1998)), commonly known as the "rape shield"…”
People v. Carter, 2022 IL App (1st) 210261 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “On direct appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine and allowing the State to elicit testimony in violation of the rape shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West…”
People v. Rowland (Ill. App. Ct. 2026).
— 725 ILCS 5/115-7(a)(2) — 3 cases
People v. Santos, 813 N.E.2d 159 (Ill. 2004). “The court also addressed an issue likely to recur on remand, and reversed the trial court's ruling that certain evidence must be excluded pursuant to section 115-7 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 1998)), commonly known as the "rape shield"…”
People v. Cerda, 2014 IL App (1st) 120484 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “¶ 195 For all these reasons, we do not find this argument persuasive. ¶ 196 III. Evidence Barred by the Rape Shield Statute ¶ 197 Defendant also claims that the trial court erred in barring evidence pursuant to the rape shield statute.”
People v. Carter, 2022 IL App (1st) 210261 (Ill. App. Ct. 2022). “On direct appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine and allowing the State to elicit testimony in violation of the rape shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West…”
— 725 ILCS 5/115-7(b) — 5 cases
People v. Maxwell, 2011 IL App (4th) 100434 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “Although the court based its ruling on the rape-shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 2010)), defendant notes that subsection (a) of the statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2010)) allowed evidence of the alleged victim’s “prior sexual activity” if admission of such evidence was…”
People v. Maxwell, 961 N.E.2d 964 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “Although the court based its ruling on the rape-shield statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7 (West 2010)), defendant notes that subsection (a) of the statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7(a) (West 2010)) allowed evidence of the alleged victim's "prior sexual activity" if admission of such evidence was…”
People v. Cerda, 2014 IL App (1st) 120484 (Ill. App. Ct. 2014). “¶ 195 For all these reasons, we do not find this argument persuasive. ¶ 196 III. Evidence Barred by the Rape Shield Statute ¶ 197 Defendant also claims that the trial court erred in barring evidence pursuant to the rape shield statute.”
People v. Gallegos-Ortiz, 2020 IL App (2d) 170739-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2020).
People v. Taylor, 2022 IL App (1st) 201058-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2022).
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.