State v. Roath

Montana Supreme Court

State v. Roath

152 Mont. 19

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 27, 1968

DocketNO. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 152 Mont. 19 (State v. Roath) 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. Roath, 152 Mont. 19 (Mo. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

DECISION

The application of the above-named defendant for a review of the sentence of 15 years, imposed on September 14, 1966, was fully heard and after a careful consideration of the entire matter it is decided that:

(1) The sentence be reduced to 10 years.

The reason for the above decision is that with only a minor past arrest record and no prior felony convictions, the prisoner was given a sentence of 15 years for robbery, or about 5 years in excess of the sentence usually imposed under the circumstances. Additionally, the prisoner has an outstanding record of improvement in the institution with attitude, habits and general conduct all considered good.

SENTENCE REVIEW DIVISION Victor H. Fall, chairman; Philip C. Duncan, Paul G. Hatfield.

The action taken herein is not to be construed as being any indication whatever that the Sentence Review Division feels the same should influence, in any way, any other official, Board or person.

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

DECISION

The application of the above-named defendant for a review of the sentence of 15 years, imposed on September 14, 1966, was fully heard and after a careful consideration of the entire matter it is decided that:

(1) The sentence be reduced to 10 years.

The reason for the above decision is that with only a minor past arrest record and no prior felony convictions, the prisoner was given a sentence of 15 years for robbery, or about 5 years in excess of the sentence usually imposed under the circumstances. Additionally, the prisoner has an outstanding record of improvement in the institution with attitude, habits and general conduct all considered good.

SENTENCE REVIEW DIVISION Victor H. Fall, chairman; Philip C. Duncan, Paul G. Hatfield.

The action taken herein is not to be construed as being any indication whatever that the Sentence Review Division feels the same should influence, in any way, any other official, Board or person.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 Mont. 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-roath-mont-1968.