(725 ILCS 5/114-15)

(Section scheduled to be repealed on January 1, 2024)

Sec. 114-15. Intellectual disability.

(a) In a first degree murder case in which the State seeks the death penalty as an appropriate sentence, any party may raise the issue of the defendant's intellectual disabilities by motion. A defendant wishing to raise the issue of his or her intellectual disabilities shall provide written notice to the State and the court as soon as the defendant reasonably believes such issue will be raised.

(b) The issue of the defendant's intellectual disabilities shall be determined in a pretrial hearing. The court shall be the fact finder on the issue of the defendant's intellectual disabilities and shall determine the issue by a preponderance of evidence in which the moving party has the burden of proof. The court may appoint an expert in the field of intellectual disabilities. The defendant and the State may offer experts from the field of intellectual disabilities. The court shall determine admissibility of evidence and qualification as an expert.

(c) If after a plea of guilty to first degree murder, or a finding of guilty of first degree murder in a bench trial, or a verdict of guilty for first degree murder in a jury trial, or on a matter remanded from the Supreme Court for sentencing for first degree murder, and the State seeks the death penalty as an appropriate sentence, the defendant may raise the issue of defendant's intellectual disabilities not at eligibility but at aggravation and mitigation. The defendant and the State may offer experts from the field of intellectual disabilities. The court shall determine admissibility of evidence and qualification as an expert.

(d) In determining whether the defendant is a person with an intellectual disability, the intellectual disability must have manifested itself by the age of 18. IQ tests and psychometric tests administered to the defendant must be the kind and type recognized by experts in the field of intellectual disabilities. In order for the defendant to be considered a person with an intellectual disability, a low IQ must be accompanied by significant deficits in adaptive behavior in at least 2 of the following skill areas: communication, self-care, social or interpersonal skills, home living, self-direction, academics, health and safety, use of community resources, and work. An intelligence quotient (IQ) of 75 or below is presumptive evidence of an intellectual disability.

(e) Evidence of an intellectual disability that did not result in disqualifying the case as a capital case, may be introduced as evidence in mitigation during a capital sentencing hearing. A failure of the court to determine that the defendant is a person with an intellectual disability does not preclude the court during trial from allowing evidence relating to mental disability should the court deem it appropriate.

(f) If the court determines at a pretrial hearing or after remand that a capital defendant is a person with an intellectual disability, and the State does not appeal pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 604, the case shall no longer be considered a capital case and the procedural guidelines established for capital cases shall no longer be applicable to the defendant. In that case, the defendant shall be sentenced under the sentencing provisions of Chapter V of the Unified Code of Corrections.

(Source: P.A. 99-143, eff. 7-27-15. Repealed by P.A. 103-51, eff. 1-1-24.)