Court Opinion

ID: 8028856
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-09-09 02:57:19.834326+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:36:54.005199
License: Public Domain

On March 24,1998, the Defendant was sentenced to four (4) years to the Montana Women’s Prison.
On September 18, 1998, 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 via teleconference and informed of her right to be represented by counsel. Defendant 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 she understood this and stated that she 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.
After careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.
Chairman, Hon. Robert Boyd, Alt. Member, Hon. John C. McKeon and Alt. Member, Hon. Robert Holmstrom.
The Sentence Review Board wishes to thank Michelle L. Jones for representing herself in this matter.