WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 1754

EAVESDROP-STATEWIDE GRAND JURY

104th Regular Session Introduced by Willie Preston and 1 co-sponsor

SB 1754 would expand where crimes can be tried, allow AG‑level eavesdropping orders in felonies, and empower a Statewide Grand Jury to prosecute multi‑county property and violent o

Added as Chief Co-Sponsor Sen. Willie Preston
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 1754

SB 1754 — EAVESDROP‑STATEWIDE GRAND JURY

Sponsor: Sen. Elgie R. Sims, Jr. (primary); Chief Co‑Sponsor added: Sen. Willie Preston
Introduced: Feb 28, 2025

Purpose / Intent

SB 1754 would (1) expand where certain crimes may be prosecuted (venue), (2) broaden which officials may seek judicial authorization to use eavesdropping devices in felony investigations, and (3) expand the jurisdiction of the Statewide Grand Jury to investigate, indict, and prosecute specified multi‑county property and violent offenses.

Key provisions

  • Amendments to venue rules (720 ILCS 5/1‑6 and related sections):

    • Clarifies and expands the list of offenses that may be tried in any county where elements or control occurred.
    • Explicitly states that methamphetamine trafficking (and trafficking in cannabis or other controlled substances, as indicated) may be tried in any county. (Language appears in new subsection (r) addressing methamphetamine and related trafficking offenses.)

  • Eavesdropping / wiretap authorization (amendments to 725 ILCS 5/108A‑1, ‑3, ‑6, ‑11):

    • Permits the Attorney General, or an Assistant Attorney General authorized by the AG, to authorize an application to a circuit judge or an associate judge (as assigned by the Chief Judge of the circuit) for an order authorizing use of an eavesdropping device.
    • Such eavesdropping may be authorized for law enforcement investigations of any felony under Illinois law where at least one party to the conversation has consented to monitoring, or was previously monitored in an emergency situation.
    • Orders must conform to the Judicial Supervision of the Use of Eavesdropping Devices Article of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

  • Statewide Grand Jury Act amendments (725 ILCS 215/2‑4):

    • A Statewide Grand Jury would be able to investigate, indict, and prosecute specified offenses when the conduct involves acts occurring in more than one Illinois county. Listed offenses include:
    • Theft and retail theft
    • Internet offenses, online sale of stolen property, online theft by deception, electronic fencing (referenced elsewhere in statute)
    • Continuing financial crimes enterprise
    • Vehicular hijacking and aggravated vehicular hijacking
    • Vehicular invasion
    • Burglary, residential burglary, and home invasion

Who is affected

  • Defendants: expanded venue options increase counties where trials may be held (potential for venue selection/consolidation).
  • Prosecutors and courts: new authority for the Attorney General to initiate eavesdrop applications and expanded statewide grand jury prosecutorial reach for multi‑county offenses.
  • Law enforcement: broader procedural route to obtain court authorization for eavesdropping in felony investigations (with one‑party consent).
  • Victims and multi‑county crime victims: potential for centralized investigation and prosecution via Statewide Grand Jury.

Procedural status (as of record)

  • Introduced in Senate: Feb 5, 2025 (filed Feb 28, 2025); passed the Senate (read and passed April 30, 2025).
  • Referred to House committees after receipt from Senate (Ways & Means; Community Affairs; other referrals listed).
  • Final recorded disposition: died in committee (Community Affairs) on June 16, 2025. (The bill had earlier actions including being reported favorably in committee and being placed on calendars; it did not become law in the 2025 session.)

Notes / implications

  • The bill combines venue expansion with procedural changes to wiretap/eavesdropping authorizations and strengthens the Statewide Grand Jury’s authority for multi‑county property and violent crimes.
  • Practical effects could include greater centralization of prosecutions for multi‑jurisdiction crimes and expanded AG involvement in obtaining eavesdropping orders; it also raises customary considerations about venue fairness and oversight of electronic surveillance.

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

Sign in to ask a question.