WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 3406

Relating to higher education.

2025 Regular Session

Adds fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer to civil forfeiture grounds for vehicles, vessels, or aircraft used with the owner's knowledge and consent.

In committee upon adjournment.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 3406

HB 3406 — Summary (Introduced Feb 18 / Filed Feb 26, 2025)

Note on title/content: although captioned “Relating to higher education,” the bill text shown amends the Criminal Code of 2012 (720 ILCS 5/36‑1) and concerns property forfeiture for vehicles and other conveyances. This summary follows the text as introduced.

Purpose / Intent

HB 3406 adds fleeing and aggravated fleeing/attempting to elude a peace officer to the list of offenses that can render a vessel/watercraft, vehicle, or aircraft subject to forfeiture. The declared intent is to make conveyances used (with the owner’s knowledge and consent) in fleeing or attempting to elude law enforcement forfeitable under existing forfeiture law.

Key provisions

  • Amends 720 ILCS 5/36‑1 (Property subject to forfeiture).
  • Inserts offenses from the Illinois Vehicle Code:
    • Section 11‑204 (fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer), and
    • Section 11‑204.1 (aggravated fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer), into the list of crimes that, when committed (or attempted) using a vessel, vehicle, or aircraft with the owner’s knowledge and consent, subject that vehicle/vessel/aircraft to civil forfeiture.
  • Maintains the requirement that the conveyance was used “with the knowledge and consent of the owner” (i.e., owner must have known about and consented to the use in the offense).

(The bill text as provided is truncated beyond this insertion; it otherwise leaves existing forfeiture procedures in place.)

Who would be affected

  • Vehicle, vessel, and aircraft owners who knowingly permit their property to be used in fleeing/attempting to elude a peace officer could face forfeiture of the conveyance.
  • Law enforcement agencies would gain an additional statutory basis to seek forfeiture of vehicles used in those offenses.
  • Third parties with legal interests in a vehicle (lenders, lessors, insurers) could be indirectly affected through forfeiture proceedings (outcomes depend on existing forfeiture law and defenses).
  • Owners whose property is used without their knowledge/consent would not be covered by this new forfeiture ground because the bill requires owner knowledge and consent.

Procedural status & sponsors

  • Introduced by Rep. Patrick Sheehan; cosponsors: Michael J. Kelly, Kevin Schmidt, Jennifer Sanalitro, Joe C. Sosnowski, Nicole La Ha.
  • Timeline highlights: First reading 2/18/2025; filed 2/26/2025; referred to Rules then to Public Health; read first time 3/21/2025. As of 6/28/2025 the bill is “in committee upon adjournment.”
  • No effective date or fiscal/implementation details included in the introduced text.

Potential implications / considerations

  • Provides law enforcement with an additional deterrent and enforcement tool against high‑speed or otherwise dangerous eluding incidents.
  • The “knowledge and consent” requirement narrows reach to knowingly complicit owners, reducing risk of forfeiting property of unaware owners, but may raise procedural and evidentiary questions in forfeiture proceedings (proof of owner knowledge/consent).
  • May raise due‑process and property‑rights concerns in contested forfeitures; impacts on secured creditors and leasing arrangements would depend on how existing forfeiture procedure treats third‑party interests.

If you would like, I can:
- Compare the bill’s language to current 720 ILCS 5/36‑1 and Illinois Vehicle Code sections referenced, or
- Draft a brief of likely stakeholder positions (law enforcement, civil libertarians, lenders, insurers).

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

Sign in to ask a question.