People v. Vasquez, 2012 IL App (2d) 101132

Vasquez was convicted on 16 counts of aggravated DUI resulting in multiple deaths and 5 counts of reckless homicide; she was sentenced to 15 years in prison.
Defendant challenged the constitutionality of section 11-501(d)(2)(G) of the Vehicle Code, which permits probation only if the court finds extraordinary circumstances.
The statute directs that, for aggravated DUI resulting in deaths, the court must impose a prison term unless extraordinary circumstances exist and require probation.
The trial evidence included BAC extrapolations, speeding over the limit, a headlight out, and nine occupants in a vehicle designed for five.
The defense argued mitigating factors and extraordinary circumstances warranted probation; the court rejected that and imposed a lengthy prison sentence within the statutory range.
The appellate court affirmed the conviction and sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is the extraordinary circumstances provision vague?	Vasquez argues the phrase is vague.	Vasquez contends lack of definition allows arbitrary application.	Not unconstitutionally vague; statute valid.
Is the 15-year sentence excessive given the circumstances?	Vasquez asserts abuse of discretion and excessive sentence.	State argues within-range sentencing with proper discretion.	Not an abuse of discretion; sentence affirmed.

People v. Winningham, 391 Ill. App. 3d 476 (2010) (not unconstitutionally vague; extraordinary circumstances limited discretion)
People v. Hill, 2012 IL App (5th) 100536 (2012) (upheld not vague; extraordinary circumstances guiding probation)
People v. Ramos, 316 Ill. App. 3d 18 (2000) (due process requires reasonable notice of prohibited conduct)
People v. McLaurin, 184 Ill. 2d 58 (1998) (limits on vagueness; ‘cold, calculated’ style guiding discretion)
People v. Lucas, 132 Ill. 2d 399 (1989) (not so subjective as to negate guidance to sentencing)