Case Name: STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. RANDALL PRUITT, Defendant
Court: Montana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Montana
Decision Date: 2001-11-06
Citations: 308 Mont. 92
Docket Number: No. DC-00-124
Parties: STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. RANDALL PRUITT, Defendant,
Judges: Chairman, Hon. Jeffrey H. Langton, Member, Hon. David Cybulski and Member, Hon. Katherine R. Curtis.
Reporter: Montana Reports
Volume: 308
Pages: 92–93

Head Matter:
FROM: The District Court of the 18th Judicial District. County of Gallatin.
STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. RANDALL PRUITT, Defendant,
No. DC-00-124

Opinion:
Decision
On January 31, 2001, the defendant was sentenced to twenty (20) years in the Montana State Prison, with ten (10) years suspended, for the offense of Robbery, a felony. For the weapon enhancement, the defendant was sentenced to ten (10) years in the Montana State Prison, with eight (8) years suspended, to be served consecutively to the sentence imposed for Robbery.
On October 11, 2001, 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 Jennifer Bordy. 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).
DATED this 6th day of November, 2001.
Done in open Court this 11th day of October, 2001.
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.
Chairman, Hon. Jeffrey H. Langton, Member, Hon. David Cybulski and Member, Hon. Katherine R. Curtis.