Case Name: STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL ELLENBURG, Defendant
Court: Montana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Montana
Decision Date: 2007-02-23
Citations: 340 Mont. 7
Docket Number: Cause No. DC-97-12940
Parties: STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL ELLENBURG, Defendant,
Judges: Chairperson, Hon. Randal I. Spaulding, Member, Hon. Katherine Irigoin and Member, Hon. Stewart Stadler
Reporter: Montana Reports
Volume: 340
Pages: 7–8

Head Matter:
Done in open Court this 8th day of February, 2007.
DATED this 23rd day of February, 2007.
STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. MICHAEL ELLENBURG, Defendant,
Cause No. DC-97-12940
DECISION

Opinion:
On March 8, 2006, the defendant was sentenced for violation of the conditions of a suspended sentence as follows: Count II: Ten (10) years in the Montana State Prison for the offense of Theft, a felony; Count III: Ten (10) years in the Montana State Prison for the offense of Theft, a felony; and Count IV: Five (5) years in the Montana State Prison, for the offense of Forgery, a felony. The sentences on Counts II & III shall run consecutively with each other and consecutively to the sentence imposed on Count IV.
On February 8, 2007, the defendant's application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.
The defendant was present and was represented by Eric Olson. The state was not represented.
Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.
Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana provides that "the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct, and the sentence will not be reduced or increased unless it is deemed clearly inadequate or excessive." (§46-18-904(3), MCA).
The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is inadequate or excessive.
Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.
Chairperson, Hon. Randal I. Spaulding, Member, Hon. Katherine Irigoin and Member, Hon. Stewart Stadler