Court Opinion

ID: 8028087
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 02:52:50.667716+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:36:52.915439
License: Public Domain

On December 9,1992, the Defendant’s prior suspended sentences were revoked and the Defendant was sentenced to a term often (10) years on Count I, Assault; ten (10) years on Count II, Assault; and ten (10) years on Count V, Bail Jumping. Count I and II shall run concurrent with each other and Count V shall run consecutive to Count I and II. The Defendant is given 117 days credit for time served.
On May 6,1993, 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 if such is possible. 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.
After careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.
The reason for the decision is the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct pursuant to Section 46-18-904(3), MCA. The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to deem inadequate or excessive as required to overcome the presumption per Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.
Hon. Thomas McKittrick, Chairman, Hon. G. Todd Baugh, and Hon. John Warner, Judges
The Sentence Review Board wishes to thank Mr. Hiner for representing himself in this matter.