Court Opinion

ID: 8028511
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 02:55:32.322886+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:36:53.406724
License: Public Domain

On September 27,1995, the Court found the defendant in violation of the conditions of his deferred sentence for the offense of Theft, a Felony, and it is the judgment of the Court that defendant’s prior deferred sentence is hereby revoked and that the defendant be and he is hereby committed to the Department of Corrections for a term of ten (10) years for suitable placement, which may include an appropriate community based program, facility, or a State correctional institution. It is the recommendation of the Court that the defendant be considered for placement in the Swan River Correctional Training Program. It is the recommendation of the Court that as a condition of any parole or early release that the defendant abide by all of the conditions and provisions of the judgment done in open Court on the 7th day of July, 1995, together with the additional conditions as stated in the September 27, 1995 judgment. The defendant shall receive credit for fifty-nine (59) 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.
*32DATED this 19th day of March, 1996.
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 Joel Rain Trimble for representing himself in this matter.