by a written motion filed within 30 days following the imposition of sentence.” 730 ILCS 5/5—8—1(c) (West 1994) (eff. August 11, 1993). The mandatory language of section 5—8—1(c) has been interpreted to mean that a defendant who fails to file a post-sentencing motion challenging the correctness of the sentence waives appellate review of the matter unless it appears that the trial court imposed consecutive or extended sentences without legal justification. See People v. Reed, 282 Ill. App. 3d 278, 280-81 (1996) (cautioning litigants about ignoring the waiver rule only because "substantial” or "fundamental” rights are implicated). Here, defendant essentially argues that he was denied fundamental fairness in sentencing. See People v. Brown, 249 Ill. App. 3d 986, 620 N.E.2d 1090 (1993) (<HOLDING>). Defendant did not raise this issue before the
holding that potential class members are similarly situated to the named plaintiffs if they are similarly situated with respect to their job requirements and pay provisions holding that defendants are not similarly situated for sentencing purposes where one defendant accepts responsibility but the other does not holding equal protection under the federal constitution applies to similarly situated persons recognizing fundamental fairness requires criminal defendants be granted a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense holding that fundamental fairness requires that defendants similarly situated should not receive grossly disparate sentences