860159 | Utah | Nov 19, 1987

746 P.2d 762" court="Utah" date_filed="1987-11-19" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/state-v-gerrish-1384553?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="1384553">746 P.2d 762 (1987)

STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Oliver Benjamin GERRISH, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 860159.

Supreme Court of Utah.

November 19, 1987.

Jo Carol Nesset-Sale and Curtis C. Nesset, Salt Lake City, for defendant and appellant.

David L. Wilkinson and Sandra L. Sjogren, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

HALL, Chief Justice:

In September 1985, defendant pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated sexual abuse of a child, a first degree felony.[1] The crime is punishable by incarceration for a minimum mandatory term of three, six, or nine years.[2]

In October 1985, defendant was sentenced to a minimum mandatory sentence of ten years. In November 1985, this erroneous sentence was amended without hearing to specify a minimum mandatory term of six years.

In February 1986, the trial court sua sponte resentenced defendant, with defendant and his counsel present. Defendant's motion to have sections 76-5-404.1(4) and 76-3-406(1) declared unconstitutional was denied. Defendant was resentenced to a minimum mandatory term of six years.

On appeal, defendant claims that the minimum mandatory sentencing scheme set forth in Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-5-404.1(4) (1987), 76-3-201(5)-(10) (Supp. 1985) (amended 1986 & 1987), 76-3-406(1) (Supp. 1985) (amended 1986), and 77-27-9(2) (Supp. 1985) (amended 1986) is unconstitutionally vague. In State v. Egbert,[3] we faced a similar challenge to the minimum mandatory sentencing requirements of Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-405(2) (Supp. 1983) (amended 1986) and § 76-3-201(5) (Supp. 1983) (amended 1984, 1986, & 1987), and there the Court held the minimum mandatory provisions constitutional. The minimum mandatory sentencing scheme challenged in this case is substantively no different than that challenged in Egbert.[4] Therefore, our ruling in Egbert controls this appeal.

Defendant's sentence is affirmed.

STEWART, Associate C.J., and HOWE, DURHAM and ZIMMERMAN, JJ., concur.

NOTES

[1] Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-404.1(3)-(4) (Supp. 1987).

[2] Id. at -404.1(4); see also Utah Code Ann. §§ 76-3-201(5)-(10) (Supp. 1985) (amended 1986 & 1987), -406 (Supp. 1985) (amended 1986), 77-27-9(2) (Supp. 1985) (amended 1986).

[3] 748 P.2d 558" court="Utah" date_filed="1987-09-28" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/state-v-egbert-1454339?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="1454339">748 P.2d 558 (Utah 1987).

[4] See id. at 559, n. 2.

© 2024 Midpage AI does not provide legal advice. By using midpage, you consent to our Terms and Conditions.