People v. Schmidt, 938 N.E.2d 559

Schmidt was charged in Hancock County with unlawful use of property, unlawful possession of methamphetamine precursor, unlawful possession of methamphetamine, obstructing justice, and aggravated fleeing or eluding; acquitted of burglary and unlawful participation in meth manufacturing; convicted on the remaining counts and sentenced to concurrent terms totaling 26 years (20, 20, 4, 2, 2).
Evidence showed items used to manufacture methamphetamine found at a Quonset hut and in the area where Schmidt was observed; a blue container with pseudoephedrine and methamphetamine was recovered, and methamphetamine was found in the truck.
Forensic testing found methamphetamine and pseudoephedrine in the substances recovered; the percentage of pseudoephedrine could not be determined.
The trial court designated Schmidt a Class X offender for two felonies and imposed concurrent sentences; later, a judgment notwithstanding the verdict was entered on the aggravated assault conviction.
At issue on appeal was the constitutionality of §35 of the Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act, sufficiency of the evidence for possession of a methamphetamine precursor with intent to manufacture, and one-act, one-crime concerns regarding duplicative convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of §35 of the Act under rational basis, vagueness, and overbreadth.	Schmidt argues §35 bears no rational relation and is overbroad and vague.	People contend §35 reasonably furthers public interest in curbing meth manufacture.	Section 35 passes rational basis, is not vague, and is not overbroad here.
Sufficiency of evidence for possession of a meth precursor with intent to manufacture.	State claims sufficient evidence via total circumstances and flight.	Schmidt contends evidence fails to show possession with intent.	Evidence supports beyond a reasonable doubt under §20(b)(1).
One-act, one-crime—whether possession of methamphetamine and precursor are lesser-included offenses of unlawful use of property.	State argues separate acts not the same; convictions stand.	Schmidt argues duplicative convictions.	Conviction for possession of methamphetamine vacated as lesser-included; precursor conviction stands; remand for sentencing correction.
Potential severability and severance implications for the challenged provisions.

People v. Wright, 194 Ill. 2d 1 (2000) (due process and rational basis principles in reviewing statutes)
In re K.C., 186 Ill. 2d 542 (1999) (limits on due process and severability concepts)
People v. Falbe, 189 Ill. 2d 635 (2000) (rational basis and vagueness standards in criminal statutes)
People v. Adams, 144 Ill. 2d 381 (1991) (rational basis test for public interest needs)
People v. Boeckmann, 238 Ill. 2d 1 (2010) (framework for substantial state interests and rational connection)
McCarty, 223 Ill. 2d 109 (2006) (legislative discretion in tailoring penalties for methamphetamine offenses)
People v. Stein, 52 Ill. 2d 570 (1972) (limits on addressing hypothetical scenarios in statutory interpretation)
Jacobs v. City of Chicago, 53 Ill. 2d 421 (1973) (precision of statutory limitations in enforcement)
People v. Conlan, 189 Ill. 2d 286 (2000) (vagueness as applied to prosecutions)
People v. Anderson, 148 Ill. 2d 15 (1992) (arbitrary enforcement concerns in penal statutes)
Virginia v. Hicks, 539 U.S. 113 (2003) (overbreadth and freedom of expression considerations)
Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983) (risk of arbitrary police enforcement)