In People v. Lewis, 379 Ill. App. 3d 336, 883 N.E.2d 759, 318 Ill. Dec. 528 (2008), the trial court found the defendant guilty of possession of a controlled substance following a stipulated bench trial. Lewis, 379 Ill. App. 3d at 337, 883 N.E.2d at 759. As part of the defendant's sentence the court assessed a $ 100 street-value fine. Lewis, 379 Ill. App. 3d at 338, 883 N.E.2d at 760. The defendant in Lewis appealed and cited Spencer, Gonzalez, Simpson, and Otero for the assertion "that the failure to support a street-value fine with any evidentiary basis constitutes plain error." Lewis, 379 Ill. App. 3d at 338, 883 N.E.2d at 760. The Court acknowledged that those cases stand for the proposition the defendant asserted but declined to follow them because they "do not comport with section 5-8-1(c) of the Unified Code or with our supreme court's decision in Reed." Lewis, 379 Ill. App. 3d at 339, 883 N.E.2d at 761. The Lewis court found the defendant forfeited his argument and rejected his contention that the plain-error rule applied to the trial court's imposition of the $ 100 street-value fine without any evidence of the value of the drugs. In doing so, the Lewis court stated the following: "If the plain-error rule applied to a sentencing sanction as minimal as a $ 100 fine, then surely nothing would be left of the requirement the legislature imposed by its amendment in August 1993 to section 5-8-1(c) or the decision of the Supreme Court of Illinois in Reed to give meaning to that amendment." Lewis, 379 Ill. App. 3d at 341, 883 N.E.2d at 762.