Case Name: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. STANLEY E. OLIVO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: Illinois Appellate Court
Jurisdiction: Illinois
Decision Date: 1997-05-20
Citations: 288 Ill. App. 3d 414
Docket Number: No. 3—96—0726
Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. STANLEY E. OLIVO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Illinois Appellate Court Reports, Third Series
Volume: 288
Pages: 414–417

Head Matter:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. STANLEY E. OLIVO, Defendant-Appellant.
Third District
No. 3—96—0726
Opinion filed May 20, 1997.
Rehearing denied June 26, 1997.
HOMER, J., dissenting.
Stephen Omolecki, of State Appellate Defender’s Office, of Ottawa, for appellant.
Lance Peterson, State’s Attorney, of Morris (John X. Breslin, of State’s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor’s Office, of counsel), and Richard Leonard, of Ottawa, for the People.

Opinion:
JUSTICE MICHELA
delivered the opinion of the court:
The defendant, Stanley E. Olivo, pled guilty to unlawful possession of a stolen vehicle and reckless homicide. 625 ILCS 5/4 — 103(a)(1) (West 1994); 720 ILCS 5/9 — 3(a) (West 1994). He was subsequently sentenced to a 40-year term of imprisonment for unlawful possession of a stolen vehicle and a concurrent five-year term of imprisonment for reckless homicide. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in imposing a Class X extended term of imprisonment for unlawful possession of a stolen vehicle. We affirm.
The presentence investigation report indicated that the defendant had five prior Class 2 felony convictions that all arose out of different acts. At the sentencing hearing, the court used two of the defendant's prior offenses to enhance his sentence for possession of a stolen vehicle, a Class 2 felony, to a Class X sentence. See 730 ILCS 5/5 — 5—3(c)(8) (West 1994). The trial court then found the defendant eligible for an extended sentence based on his third Class 2 felony. See 730 ILCS 5/5 — 5—3.2(b)(1) (West 1994). The court then imposed an extended Class X sentence of 40 years of imprisonment. See 730 ILCS 5/5 — 8—2(a)(2) (West 1994).
On appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court erred in imposing an extended Class X sentence for unlawful possession of a stolen vehicle. He contends that although his sentence was properly enhanced to Class X status, he was not eligible for a Class X extended term because he had never been previously convicted of a Class X felony.
When a defendant is convicted of a Class 2 felony after having two prior convictions of any Class 2 or greater felonies in Illinois, and such charges arise out of different series of acts, the defendant shall be sentenced as a Class X offender. See 730 ILCS 5/5 — 5—3(c)(8) (West 1994). When a defendant's sentence is increased under these circumstances, the classification of the charged offense remains the same. People v. Thomas, 171 Ill. 2d 207, 664 N.E.2d 76 (1996). Further, a defendant may receive an extended-term sentence when he is convicted of any felony after having been previously convicted in Illinois of the same or greater class felony within 10 years and the felonies arise out of different acts. See 730 ILCS 5/5 — 5—3.2(b)(1) (West 1994).
We find that the trial court properly imposed an extended Class X sentence. A defendant is eligible for an extended sentence if he has a prior conviction of the same or greater class as his current conviction, not his current sentence. See 730 ILCS 5/5 — 5—3.2(b)(1) (West 1994). Here, the defendant's current conviction was a Class 2 felony and his prior offenses were all Class 2 felonies. Therefore, he was eligible for an extended sentence. Additionally, as the defendant concedes, he was to be sentenced as a Class X offender. The only logical extension of a Class X sentence is a Class X extended term. Accordingly, we find that the trial court did not err in imposing a Class X extended sentence.
The judgment of the circuit court of Grundy County is affirmed.
Affirmed.
HOLDRIDGE, J., concurs.