Article IV. Rules on Criminal Proceedings in the Trial Court · Part C. Trials · Not amended since adoption on record · Last verified July 20, 2026
In one sentenceRule 431 requires the trial judge to ask every prospective juror whether they understand and accept the presumption of innocence, the state's burden of proof, the defendant's right to present no evidence, and the rule against holding a defendant's silence against them.
(a)The court shall conduct voir dire examination of prospective jurors by putting to them
questions it thinks appropriate, touching upon their qualifications to serve as jurors in the case at trial. The court may permit the parties to submit additional questions to it for further inquiry if it thinks they are appropriate and shall permit the parties to supplement the examination by such direct inquiry as the court deems proper for a reasonable period of time depending upon the length of examination by the court, the complexity of the case, and the nature of the charges. Questions shall not directly or indirectly concern matters of law or instructions. The court shall acquaint prospective jurors with the general duties and responsibilities of jurors.
(b)The court shall ask each potential juror, individually or in a group, whether that juror understands and accepts the following principles: (1) that the defendant is presumed innocent of the charge(s) against him or her; (2) that before a defendant can be convicted the State must prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; (3) that the defendant is not required to offer any evidence on his or her own behalf; and (4) that if a defendant does not testify it cannot be held against him or her; however, no inquiry of a prospective juror shall be made into the defendant’s decision not to testify when the defendant objects.
The court’s method of inquiry shall provide each juror an opportunity to respond to specific questions concerning the principles set out in this section.
Renumbered October 1, 1971; amended April 3, 1997, effective May 1, 1997; amended March 21, 2007, effective May 1, 2007; amended April 26, 2012, eff. July 1, 2012.
Plain-English Summary
Jury selection in a criminal case is mostly run by the judge. Rule 431 has the court put questions to prospective jurors about their qualifications, decide what supplemental questions the parties may ask, and let the parties conduct some direct inquiry of their own, but questions can't get into matters of law or jury instructions.
The rule's core requirement is specific: the judge must ask each prospective juror, individually or as part of a group, whether that juror understands and accepts four principles: that the defendant is presumed innocent, that the state must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant isn't required to present any evidence, and that a defendant's choice not to testify can't be held against them. Each juror has to get a real chance to respond to these specific points, not just nod along to a general statement of the law. If a defendant objects, the court can't inquire into that defendant's decision not to testify at all.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who asks the questions during jury selection, the judge or the lawyers?
The judge conducts the core voir dire examination, though the court can allow the parties to submit additional questions and do some direct questioning of their own.
What four principles must every juror confirm they understand?
The presumption of innocence, the state's burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant's right not to present evidence, and the rule against holding a defendant's silence against them.
Can lawyers question jurors about the law that will apply to the case?
No. Questions can't directly or indirectly get into matters of law or jury instructions.
Can jurors be asked about a defendant's decision not to testify?
Not if the defendant objects to that line of questioning.
Does each juror have to answer individually?
Each juror must have an opportunity to respond to the specific questions on these principles, whether questioned individually or as part of a group.
Committee Comments
The new language is intended to ensure compliance with the requirements of People v. Zehr, 103 Ill. 2d 472 (1984). It seeks to end the practice where the judge makes a broad statement of the applicable law followed by a general question concerning the juror’s willingness to follow the law.
Source & verification. Rule text, official Committee Comments, and
amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Illinois Supreme Court Rules,
promulgated by the Supreme Court of Illinois. Last verified July 20, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:voir dire rule illinois criminal casejury selection presumption of innocence questionsjuror understanding burden of proofjury qualification questioning criminal trialZehr questions illinois