On May 6, 1998, the Defendant was sentenced to the Montana Women’s Prison for five (5) years on Count I; five (5) years to the Montana Women’s Prison, with all five years suspended, on Count II; and five (5) years to the Montana Women’s Prison, with all five years suspended, on Count III. The sentence imposed in Count III shall run consecutive to the sentence imposed on Count II. The sentences imposed on Counts II and III shall run consecutive to the sentence imposed on Count I, for a total sentence of fifteen (15) years, with ten (10) years suspended.
On September 18,1998, 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 informed of her right to be represented by counsel. Defendant proceeded Pro Se. The state was not represented.
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 she understood this and stated that she wished to proceed.
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.
The Sentence Review Board wishes to thank Janice M. Ness for representing herself in this matter.