Case Name: STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. David Lee Priddy, Defendant
Court: Montana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Montana
Decision Date: 1996-03-19
Citations: 281 Mont. 20
Docket Number: NO. 11262
Parties: STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. David Lee Priddy, Defendant.
Judges: Chairman, Hon. Ted O. Lympus
Reporter: Montana Reports
Volume: 281
Pages: 20–21

Head Matter:
STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. David Lee Priddy, Defendant.
NO. 11262
DECISION
DATED this 19th day of March, 1996.

Opinion:
On August 30,1995, the Court found the defendant in violation of the conditions of his suspended sentence for the offense of Issuing a Bad Check - Common Scheme, a Felony, and it is the judgment of the Court that defendant's prior suspended sentence is hereby revoked and that the defendant be and he is hereby committed to the Department of Corrections for a term of eight (8) years for suitable placement. The sentence shall run concurrently with the sentence imposed in Flathead County Cause No. DC 94-057(B). It is the recommendation of the Court that as conditions of any release or early parole that the defendant shall abide by all of the conditions and provisions of the judgment done in open court on the 8th day of February, 1995, and the judgment done in Flathead County Cause No. DC 94-257(B). The defendant shall receive credit for eighteen (18) days jail time which he has previously served.
On March 7,1996, 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 proceeded Pro Se. 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 to 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 provides: "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." (Section 45-18-904(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.
After careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.
Done in open Court this 7th day of March, 1996.
Chairman, Hon. Ted O. Lympus
Member, Hon. Jeffrey M. Sherlock
Member, Hon. William Neis Swandal
The Sentence Review Board wishes to thank David Lee Priddy for representing himself in this matter.