State v. Kadubeck

Montana Supreme Court

State v. Kadubeck

256 Mont. 52

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 25, 1992

DocketNO. 90-Dc-008

StatusPublished

This text of 256 Mont. 52 (State v. Kadubeck) 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. Kadubeck, 256 Mont. 52 (Mo. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

On September 11, 1991, the Defendant was sentenced to five (5) years for the revocation of Felony Assault. Credit is given for 30 days time served pursuant to the original Judgment. Credit is given for time served while on probation. Plus the defendant received terms of parole as stated in the September 11,1991, Judgment.

On September 25,1992, the Defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

[53]*53DATED this 25th day of September, 1992.

The Defendant was present and represented himself. The state was not represented.

Before hearing the application, the Defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division is here to consider the sentence which was imposed by Judge R. D. McPhillips. This board has the authority to increase the sentence, to leave it as is, or to reduce it. In the event that the Board would decide the alternative to increase the sentence, the proceedings will be stayed, an attorney would be appointed, and the proceedings would be rescheduled for a later date. In the event that the Board determines the sentence will remain as is or reduce it, the Board will go ahead with that decision. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he did not wish to proceed, hut wanted his case dismissed.

After careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the petitioner’s request is hereby granted and the Petition for Sentence Review shall be dismissed with prejudice.

Hon. Ed McLean, Chairman, Hon. Thomas M. McKittrick, and Hon. G. Todd Baugh, Judges.

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

On September 11, 1991, the Defendant was sentenced to five (5) years for the revocation of Felony Assault. Credit is given for 30 days time served pursuant to the original Judgment. Credit is given for time served while on probation. Plus the defendant received terms of parole as stated in the September 11,1991, Judgment.

On September 25,1992, the Defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

[53]*53DATED this 25th day of September, 1992.

The Defendant was present and represented himself. The state was not represented.

Before hearing the application, the Defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division is here to consider the sentence which was imposed by Judge R. D. McPhillips. This board has the authority to increase the sentence, to leave it as is, or to reduce it. In the event that the Board would decide the alternative to increase the sentence, the proceedings will be stayed, an attorney would be appointed, and the proceedings would be rescheduled for a later date. In the event that the Board determines the sentence will remain as is or reduce it, the Board will go ahead with that decision. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he did not wish to proceed, hut wanted his case dismissed.

After careful consideration, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the petitioner’s request is hereby granted and the Petition for Sentence Review shall be dismissed with prejudice.

Hon. Ed McLean, Chairman, Hon. Thomas M. McKittrick, and Hon. G. Todd Baugh, Judges.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 Mont. 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-kadubeck-mont-1992.