Opinion ID: 879881
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Issue 11Order to complete sex offender program.

Text: Pease asserts that the District Court abused its discretion by ordering him to complete the sex offender program at Montana State Prison in the face of expert testimony indicating that Pease was not likely to benefit from the program. Conditions of a sentence are within the discretion of the trial judge. It is well established in this state that the trier of fact has discretion to give whatever weight it sees fit to the testimony of any expert. See, Biegalke v. Biegalke (1977), 172 Mont. 311, 317, 564 P.2d 987, 990. The sentencing judge, not the expert witness, makes the decision as to what conditions will be placed upon a convicted defendant. Section 46-18-201, MCA, states: ... (1)(b) ... The sentencing judge may impose on the defendant any reasonable restrictions or conditions ... (1)(e) commit the defendant to a correctional institution ... (1)(f) impose any combination of subsections (1)(b) through (1)(e). (Emphasis added.) Requiring Pease to complete the sex offender program is not an abuse of discretion nor is it unreasonable. The judgment of the District Court is affirmed. HARRISON, McDONOUGH, HUNT and GULBRANDSON, JJ., concur.