Opinion ID: 1518536
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Sentence Appropriate

Text: Weston's second argument on appeal is that the sentence he received was excessive and that the judge exhibited a closed mind because the judge did not properly consider the nature of the violation but simply reimposed all of Weston's unsuspended jail time. Appellate review of a sentence is limited to whether the sentence is within the statutory limits prescribed by the General Assembly and whether it is based on factual predicates which are false, impermissible, or lack minimal reliability, judicial vindictiveness or bias, or a closed mind. [5] When the sentence is within the statutory limits, this Court will not find an abuse of discretion unless it is clear that the sentencing judge relied on impermissible factors or exhibited a closed mind. [6] A judge sentences with a closed mind when the sentence is based on a preconceived bias without consideration of the nature of the offense or the character of the defendant. [7] In this case, the judge considered the nature of the violation, in particular, the presence of the drugs, gun and ammunition in Weston's residence. He also considered the character of the defendant. He concluded that Weston was a dangerous man who had been previously involved in a violence, who was currently involved in a violent matter, and who was a smart guy who knew what is going on, and had his eyes wide open. The judge must have an open mind for receiving all information related to the question of mitigation. [8] In this case, the judge listened to Weston's claims that the electronic monitoring device must have been broken, that he had gotten permission from an unnamed officer to go to job interviews, that an employer had contacted the authorities about his job and received permission for him to work, as well as Weston's denial of selling drugs. Thus, the record reflects that the judge had an open mind for receiving all the information Weston offered that was related to the issue of mitigation. [9] The judge concluded the fact that drugs were discovered in Weston's residence approximately three weeks after he was released from jail to be more compelling than Weston's excuses or denials. The record reflects that the reasoning behind the sentence, as expressed by the judge, was that Weston was a dangerous individual involved in violence, who had drugs, ammunition, and guns in his house. According to Weston, the reasoning behind his sentence was flawed. Given the evidence presented at the hearing, however, the judge's reasoning was logical and rational. Weston has not presented any evidence to support his assertion that the judge exhibited a closed mind during sentencing. Conversely, the State's evidence of Weston's probation violations was clear and convincing. Based upon the record, it was entirely appropriate for the judge to sentence Weston to be imprisoned for the remainder of the unsuspended portion of his sentence.