WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 3671

CRIM CD-VENUE-SEXUAL IMAGES

104th Regular Session Introduced by Dee Avelar and 25 co-sponsors

Allows prosecutors to try non-consensual dissemination of private sexual images in either the offender's county or the victim's county.

Public Act . . . . . . . . . 104-0323
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 3671

Summary — HB 3671 / Public Act 104-0323

Statute amended: 720 ILCS 5/1-6 (Criminal Code of 2012, Section 1-6 — Place of Trial)
Public Act: 104‑0323 | Governor approved 08/15/2025 | Effective date: 01/01/2026

Purpose

HB 3671 amends the Criminal Code’s venue rules to specify where prosecutions for the offense of non‑consensual dissemination of private sexual images may be brought. The change gives prosecutors (and courts) explicit authority to try those cases in either the county where the offense occurred or the county in which the victim resides.

Key provisions

  • Adds subsection (v) to 720 ILCS 5/1-6 to state that a person who commits non‑consensual dissemination of private sexual images may be tried in any one of the following counties:
    1. the county in which the offense occurred; or
    2. the county in which the victim resides.
  • Leaves intact the general venue principles already in Section 1-6, including:
    • Criminal actions are ordinarily tried in the county where the offense was committed.
    • The State is not required to prove at trial that the offense occurred in any particular county.
    • Objections to improper venue are waived unless made before trial.

Who or what is affected

  • Defendants charged with the statutory offense of non‑consensual dissemination of private sexual images (existing elsewhere in Illinois criminal statute).
  • Prosecutors and courts handling venue determinations in these cases.
  • Victims: the amendment allows prosecutors to bring charges in the victim’s county, regardless of whether the accused was physically present there when the offense occurred.

Practical impact

  • Expands prosecutorial venue flexibility for online and cross‑jurisdictional image dissemination cases, which frequently involve actors, hosts, or distribution across county lines.
  • May reduce procedural barriers where the precise county of upload/transmission is difficult to establish, enabling prosecution where the victim lives (potentially more convenient for victim testimony and support services).
  • Could create strategic venue considerations for defense (forum choice, pretrial motions) but does not change substantive elements or penalties of the underlying offense.

Legislative history & sponsors

  • Introduced: 02/18/2025 by Rep. Terra Costa Howard (later chief sponsor changed to Rep. Martha Deuter).
  • Passed both chambers; enrolled and approved by Governor on 08/15/2025.
  • Officially becomes Public Act 104‑0323 effective 01/01/2026.
  • Principal sponsors/co‑sponsors include Martha Deuter, Suzy Glowiak Hilton, Jennifer Sanalitro, and many others.

If you want, I can locate the statutory language that defines the underlying offense (non‑consensual dissemination of private sexual images) so you can see how this venue change interacts with the substantive crime.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.