ILCS » Chapter 730 · Act 125
Illinois Compiled Statutes

730 ILCS 125/0.01 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(730 ILCS 125/0.01) (from Ch. 75, par. 100)
    Sec. 0.01. Short title. This Act may be cited as the County Jail Act.
(Source: P.A. 86-1324.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1997–2008 · leading case: People v. Savage, 838 N.E.2d 247 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Savage, 838 N.E.2d 247 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “Jail officials are permitted to establish regulations and policies for jail operations beyond the minimum standards already required by statute (730 ILCS 125/0.01 through 25 (West 2002)) and the Administrative Code (20 Ill.”
People v. Hunt, 886 N.E.2d 409 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “Next, we note that the County Jail Act (730 ILCS 125/0.01 et seq. (West 2002)) provides that the sheriff of each county is the warden of the jail; that the sheriff, as warden, has custody of all prisoners in the jail; and that the sheriff, as warden, shall receive and confine…”
People v. Harper, 723 N.E.2d 1171 (Ill. App. Ct. 1999). “(West 1994)) and the County Jail Act (730 ILCS 125/0.01 et seq. (West 1994)). The supreme court determined that, even if those statutes had been violated, the suppression of evidence would not be an appropriate remedy.”
People v. Savage (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “Jail officials are permitted to establish regulations and policies for jail operations beyond the minimum standards already required by statute (730 ILCS 125/0.01 through 25 (West 2002)) and the Administrative Code (20 Ill.”
Vautsmeier v. Cnty. of Stephenson, 682 N.E.2d 233 (Ill. App. Ct. 1997). “Plaintiff based his complaint on two sections of the County Jail Act (the Act) (730 ILCS 125/0.01 et seq. (West 1994)). Section 5 of the Act provides: "All costs of maintaining persons committed for violations of Illinois law, shall be the responsibility of the county.”
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.