People v. Ragusa

Case Date: 02/06/2004
Court: 2nd District Appellate
Docket No: 2-02-1131 Rel

No. 2--02--1131


IN THE

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS

SECOND DISTRICT


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE
OF ILLINOIS,

         Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

PHILLIP P. RAGUSA,

         Defendant-Appellant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appeal from the Circuit Court of
Kendall County.



No. 02--CF--58

Honorable
Leonard J. Wojtecki,
Judge, Presiding.


JUSTICE McLAREN delivered the opinion of the court:

Defendant, Phillip P. Ragusa, appeals his convictions of and sentences for unlawfulpossession with intent to deliver methylenadioxy-methamphetamine (MDMA) or ecstasy, andcannabis (720 ILCS 570/401(a)(7.5)(A)(ii) (West 2002); 720 ILCS 550/5(d) (West 2002)). Weaffirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

The following facts are taken from the record. Defendant was charged with the followingsix counts: (I) unlawful possession with the intent to deliver more than 15 but less than 200 pillscontaining the controlled substance MDMA, commonly known as ecstasy (720 ILCS570/401(a)(7.5)(A)(ii) (West 2002)); (II) unlawful possession of more than 15 but less than 200pills containing MDMA (720 ILCS 570/402(a)(7.5)(A)(ii) (West 2002)); (III) unlawfulpossession with the intent to deliver 1 or more, but less than 15 grams of a substance containingcocaine (720 ILCS 570/401(c)(2) (West 2002)); (IV) unlawful possession of less than 15 gramsof a substance containing cocaine (720 ILCS 570/402(c) (West 2002)); (V) unlawful possessionwith the intent to deliver more than 30 grams but not more than 500 grams of a substancecontaining cannabis (720 ILCS 550/5(d) (West 2002)); and (VI) unlawful possession of morethan 30 grams but not more than 500 grams of a substance containing cannabis (720 ILCS550/4(d) (West 2002)).

Before trial, defendant filed a motion to dismiss counts I and II of the indictment and todeclare sections 401(a)(7.5)(A)(ii) and 402(a)(7.5)(A) of the Controlled Substances Act (720ILCS 570/401(a)(7.5)(A)(ii), 402(a)(7.5)(A) (West 2002)) unconstitutional as violating theproportionate penalties clause of the Illinois Constitution. Ill. Const. 1970, art. I,