Court Opinion

ID: 9715135
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:55:11.993079+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:31.891138
License: Public Domain

Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE MILLS, concurring in part and dissenting in part: The conviction should indeed be affirmed and I concur. I part ways, however, with the majority on the issue of the sentence. I would remand for resentencing. Obviously, the trial court relied — in great measure — on the mistaken element of “perjury” in determining the sentence imposed. Since that element has evaporated and was not in fact existent, the trial judge should have an opportunity to sentence anew. Wherever possible, a reviewing court should heed the caveat of Perruquet, be reluctant to superimpose its concept of a fair sentence upon a lower court whose duty and discretion it is to impose a just sentence, and allow the trial judge to correct his own mistakes.