¶1SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION UPON DENIAL OF PETITION FOR REHEARING
¶2delivered the opinion of the court:
¶3The opinion in this case was filed December 27, 1972. On January 1, 1973 the new Unified Code of Corrections (Ill. Rev. Stat., ch. 38, sec. 1001—1—1 et seq.) became effective. Thereafter, but within the time established by the applicable Supreme Court Rule, the defendant filed his petition for rehearing.
¶4 At the time defendant filed his petition for rehearing this court’s mandate had not issued and the time for filing a petition for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court had not expired. Accordingly, the decision of this court had not become a final adjudication, the appeal was still pending, and we retain jurisdiction to alter or modify our decision. See the supplemental opinion on rehearing in People v. McCloskey, 2 Ill.App.3d 892, 274 N.E.2d 358. Although the additional supplemental opinion in McCloskey apparently made dicta of its supplemental opinion on rehearing we think the reasoning sound and adopt it here.
¶5 Under the authority of People v. Shadowens, 10 Ill.App.3d 450, 294 N.E.2d 107 and People v. Hendrickson (1973), 11 Ill.App.3d 219, the sentence imposed in this case should be in conformity with the Unified Code of Corrections. Since forgery is a Class 3 felony punishable by a sentence of one to ten years and sec. 5—8—1 of the Code provides for a minimum term of one year unless certain findings are made by the court, and since art. 3 of the Code provides for certain pre-sentence procedures, it is necessary that this case be remanded to the trial court for the requisite hearings and imposition of a sentence in conformity with the requirements of the Code.
¶6In all other respects defendant’s petition for rehearing is denied.
¶7Petition for rehearing denied. Cause remanded for resentencing.
¶8EBERSPACHER and G. MORAN, JJ., concur.