Title: Schott v. State

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

Schott v. State1993 WY 147864 P.2d 38Case Number: 93-88Decided: 11/30/1993Supreme Court of Wyoming
Larry 
SCHOTT,

 Appellant 
(Defendant),

v.

The 
STATE of Wyoming, 

Appellee 
(Plaintiff).

Appeal 
from the District Court, Natrona County, Dan Spangler, 
J.

Leonard 
D. Munker, State Public Defender, Deborah Cornia, Appellate Counsel, and Bobbi 
Renner, for appellant.

Joseph 
B. Meyer, Atty. Gen., Sylvia Lee Hackl, Deputy Atty. Gen., and Barbara L. Boyer, 
Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before 
THOMAS, CARDINE, GOLDEN and TAYLOR, JJ., and ROONEY, J. 
(RET.).

ROONEY, 
Justice (Retired).

[¶1]      Appellant appeals 
from an order revoking his probation on the ground that the order placing him on 
probation (an order changing an original incarceration sentence) was 
illegal.

[¶2]      On June 14, 1983, 
and after a plea of guilty to two counts of forgery, a written judgment and 
sentence was entered (reflecting that done in open court on May 31, 1983) 
directing that appellant be incarcerated in the Wyoming State Penitentiary for a 
term of not less than one year nor more than two years on each count, with 
credit for 126 days served to be taken from both the minimum and maximum 
sentence and with the sentences to run concurrent with each other. On June 20, 
1983, a stipulation and order was entered reflecting that, "upon Motion of the 
Defendant" and stipulation between the parties, appellant was "ordered to spend 
the last 70-90 days of his Penitentiary sentence at the Wyoming State Hospital 
in the drug and alcohol abuse program." Because of appellant's back injury which 
required his hospitalization, the court deferred the time appellant was to 
report to the sheriff for delivery to the Wyoming State Penitentiary from June 
7, 1983, until the date he was released from the hospital. After such release, 
appellant did not so report. He went to Nebraska, Kansas, and Iowa.1

[¶3]      On February 26, 
1990, appellant was arrested on a bench warrant issued against him by the 
District Court for the Seventh Judicial District for his failure to serve the 
Wyoming sentence on the two counts of forgery. On April 9, 1990, appellant filed 
a motion for sentence reduction requesting that he be placed on probation under 
any conditions imposed by the court. On April 18, 1990, appellant was placed on 
probation for three years. On April 1, 1993, probation was revoked for 
appellant's failure to comply with its terms (failure to make restitution, 
failure to report, and leaving area without permission), and appellant was 
ordered to serve the incarceration sentence previously 
imposed.

[¶4]      Appellant words 
the issue on appeal as:

     Whether the revocation 
of Appellant's probation was based upon a sentence that is illegal 
because:

     (a) the sentence was 
the result of a Motion for Sentence Reduction filed nearly seven years after the 
original sentence was imposed;

     (b) the effect of said 
sentence was to lengthen rather than reduce Appellant's sentence; 
and

     (c) the sentence 
provided for a term of imprisonment in the Wyoming State Penitentiary with the 
last 70-90 days to be served in the Wyoming State Hospital for drug and alcohol 
treatment?

[¶5]      Appellee states 
the issues as:

     I. Whether the 
district court abused its discretion when it reduced appellant's sentence to a 
term of probation.

     II. Whether 
appellant's sentence upon revocation required that appellant serve the last 
70-90 days in a drug and alcohol treatment program.

[¶6]      Appellant argues 
that the revocation of his probation was illegal because the order, which was 
made on his motion, reducing his sentence and placing him on probation was a 
reduction of the original sentence and because the order was made long after the 
court lost jurisdiction, as provided for by the Wyoming Rules of Criminal 
Procedure, to reduce his sentence. Thus, he contends that, since placing him on 
probation was illegal, revoking his probation was also illegal. He also argues 
that the same order placing him on probation resulted in an illegal lengthening 
of his sentence. The order placing appellant on probation (now contested by him 
in these two respects) was made on his own motion for such. If there was error 
in either instance, it was made at the request and invitation of appellant, and 
he cannot now take advantage of it.

     In appellate practice, 
the principle of "invited error" is that if, during the progress of a cause, a 
party requests or moves the court to make a ruling which is actually erroneous, 
and the court does so, that party cannot take advantage of the error on appeal 
or review.

BLACK'S 
LAW DICTIONARY 487 (5th ed. 1979).

     The doctrine of 
"invited error" embodies the principle that a party will not be heard to 
complain on appeal of errors which he himself induced or provoked the court or 
the opposite party to commit.

5 
AM. JUR.2D Appeal and Error § 713 at 159 (1962).

[¶7]      Finally, 
appellant contends that there was error in the court's order for appellant to 
serve the last seventy to ninety days of his incarceration sentence in the 
Wyoming State Hospital. Again, the order was made on appellant's own motion. If 
the order was in error, it was invited by appellant, and he cannot now argue 
error.

[¶8]      
Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1 Since leaving Wyoming, appellant has been arrested and convicted of 
committing crimes in each of these states.