State v. Croix

Montana Supreme Court

State v. Croix

154 Mont. 8

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 29, 1969

DocketNO. 2670

StatusPublished

This text of 154 Mont. 8 (State v. Croix) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Croix, 154 Mont. 8 (Mo. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

DECISION

The applicatioon of the above-named defendant for a review of the sentence of five years for second degree assault, imposed on March 29, 1967, was fully heard and after a careful consideration of the entire matter it is decided that:

The sentence be and remain as originally imposed.

This sentence appears proper, reasonable, and quite lenient, the crime, the individual, and the sentencing goals kept in mind, especially when it is considered that the presumption is that the sentencing judge was correct in his determination; that defendant has an extensive prior criminal record, including convictions of felony; that the sentence under consideration was originally suspended and defendant was not imprisoned until violation of the terms of the suspension. Further, defendant was paroled in April, 1969, and violated it in July, 1969.

We thank David Gliko, Esq., of the Montana Defender Project for his assistance to the defendant and to the Court.

SENTENCE REVIEW DIVISION _

_ Philip C. Duncan, chairman; and Paul G. Hatfield.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DECISION

The applicatioon of the above-named defendant for a review of the sentence of five years for second degree assault, imposed on March 29, 1967, was fully heard and after a careful consideration of the entire matter it is decided that:

The sentence be and remain as originally imposed.

This sentence appears proper, reasonable, and quite lenient, the crime, the individual, and the sentencing goals kept in mind, especially when it is considered that the presumption is that the sentencing judge was correct in his determination; that defendant has an extensive prior criminal record, including convictions of felony; that the sentence under consideration was originally suspended and defendant was not imprisoned until violation of the terms of the suspension. Further, defendant was paroled in April, 1969, and violated it in July, 1969.

We thank David Gliko, Esq., of the Montana Defender Project for his assistance to the defendant and to the Court.

SENTENCE REVIEW DIVISION _

_ Philip C. Duncan, chairman; and Paul G. Hatfield.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 Mont. 8, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-croix-mont-1969.