
    STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. Michael S. Vinion, Defendant.
    NO. 10318
    DECISION
   On August 6, 1996, the Court found the defendant in violation of the conditions of his suspended sentence and it is the judgment of the Court that defendant’s prior suspended sentence is hereby revoked and that the defendant be and he is hereby committed to the Department of Corrections for a term of ten (10) years for suitable placement, which may include an appropriate community based program, facility, or a State correctional institution. It is the recommendation of the Court that the defendant be considered for placement in the pre-release center or the Swan River Correctional Training Program. It is further ordered that the defendant shall register as a sexual offender, pursuant to Section 46-23-504,46-23-505, and 46-23-506, M.C.A., with the Department of Institutions, Chief of Police, and Sheriff of the County wherein he resides for the remainder of his lifetime following his release from custody. The defendant shall further notify any law enforcement agency with whom he was last registered of any change in address as further set forth under the law and register with the Department of Institutions, Chief of Police and Sheriff if he should change his address during this registration period. Defendant shall receive credit for street time while on probation and shall receive credit for time served in the Missoula County Jail from January 20, 1995, through February 14, 1995; and from May 15, 1996, through date of sentencing, August 6, 1996, for one hundred ten (110) days.

On November 14,1996, 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 and proceeded Pro Se. The state was represented by Deputy County Attorney Robert Zimmerman of Missoula.

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 he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

DATED this 2nd day of December, 1996.

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.

Done in open Court this 14th day of November, 1996.

Chairman, Hon. Ted O. Lympus

Member, Hon. Jeffrey M. Sherlock

Member, Hon. William Neis Swandal

The Sentence Review Board wishes to thank Michael S. Vinion for representing himself in this matter and also Deputy County Attorney Robert Zimmerman.  