Legal Opinion
State v. Lane
Montana Supreme Court
Decided April 7, 1998No. 96-514PublishedCited by 76 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Regnier
¶1 James Lane appeals from the entry of a nunc pro tunc order entered by the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, correcting the written judgment and commitment to conform to the sentence as orally pronounced. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.
¶2 The dispositive issues on appeal are:
¶3 1. Did the District Court err in correcting the written judgment by nunc pro tunc order to conform with its oral pronouncement of sentence at Lane’s sentencing hearing?
¶4 2. Did entry of the nunc pro tunc order to correct Lane’s sentence violate Lane’s rights to due process?
¶5 3. Did…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- United States v. DiFrancescoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. Paul C. "Paulie" VillanoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1987
- United States v. Dean Harvey HicksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Robert Breest v. Raymond Helgemoe, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
- United States v. Darnell GarciaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by76 opinions
- Prindel v. Ravalli CountyMontana Supreme Court · 2006
- Washington v. Commissioner of CorrectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- State v. ShrevesMontana Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. KrollMontana Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. JohnsonMontana Supreme Court · 2000
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.