WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 2707

Registered providers of services for homeless persons; exempt from certain fees.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Sollie Norwood and 1 co-sponsor

SB 2707 would tighten pretrial detention by requiring a verified State petition and hearing to deny release, limited to cases where real threats or flight risk are shown with speci

Died In Committee
#publichealthandwelfare
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 2707

SB 2707 — Summary (Introduced version)

Overview / Purpose

SB 2707 would amend Illinois criminal procedure and corrections law governing denial of pretrial release and the treatment of home detention for sentencing credit. The bill (as introduced) alters the statutory standard courts use when deciding to deny pretrial release and removes certain statutory language describing when home detention counts as custodial for sentencing-credit purposes.

Note: the bill packet provided contains inconsistent metadata (title referencing “registered providers of services for homeless persons” does not match the text, and multiple dates/status entries conflict). This summary focuses on the substantive statutory text included in the version provided (amendments to 725 ILCS 5/110‑6.1 and provisions of the Unified Code of Corrections).

Key provisions

  1. Change to denial-of-pretrial-release standard (725 ILCS 5/110‑6.1)

    • Replaces language about whether conditions “mitigate” certain risks with a standard using the phrase “materially mitigate.”
    • Specifies that a court may deny pretrial release only upon verified petition by the State and a hearing, and only in enumerated circumstances where the defendant’s pretrial release:
      • Poses a “real and present threat” to any person or the community based on specific, articulable facts; or
      • Creates a risk of the defendant’s willful flight for specified serious offenses.
    • Lists qualifying offenses for possible denial (forcible felonies such as treason, murder, various sexual assaults, armed robbery, residential/home invasion, aggravated arson/kidnapping/battery, offenses under Article 11, various weapons/firearm offenses, trafficking/involuntary servitude, child‑related offenses, hate crimes, certain aggravated battery/homicide, residential burglary, etc.). (The bill text includes an extended offense list; only excerpts are shown in the provided text.)

  2. Changes to Unified Code of Corrections (730 ILCS provisions referenced)

    • Deletes a provision that defined home detention, for the purpose of credit for time served in custody, to include restrictions such as curfews of 12+ hours per day and electronic monitoring that restricts travel or movement.
    • Deletes a separate provision stating that electronic monitoring is not required for home detention to be considered custodial for sentencing credit.
    • Effect: statutory removal of specific language tying custodial credit to particular home‑detention modalities (curfew duration, electronic monitoring). (Full downstream effects depend on related statutory cross‑references and administrative practice.)

Who would be affected

  • Defendants in criminal cases (especially those charged with listed serious offenses).
  • Prosecutors and defense attorneys (decision-making and litigation over pretrial release).
  • Trial courts (risk‑assessment and evidentiary standards at pretrial hearings).
  • Persons on or seeking home detention; Departments of Corrections and local jail administrators (how time in home detention is treated for sentencing credit).
  • Private electronic monitoring providers (regulatory/statutory treatment of EM may shift practical demand or litigation).

Procedural status and timeline

  • Introduced (per user metadata) March 13, 2025. Sponsor listed: Sen. Sally J. Turner (primary), with Lee also named.
  • The user-provided status at top: “Died In Committee.” The legislative actions list shown in the document contains numerous conflicting dates and actions; consult the official General Assembly docket for a definitive status history.

Notes and uncertainties

  • The provided bill title and some metadata do not match the text; rely on the statutory excerpts (725 ILCS 5/110‑6.1 and related corrections provisions) for substance.
  • The practical impact depends on judicial interpretation of “materially mitigate” versus prior language and on how removal of the home‑detention wording interacts with existing administrative rules and sentencing practices.
  • For final legal effect or current status, verify with the Illinois General Assembly’s official bill page and the most recent enrolled/committee versions.

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

Sign in to ask a question.