Brown v. State

HILL, Chief Justice.

[T1] Appellant, James Franklin Brown (Brown), maintains that the district court erred in denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence. He argues that the sentences imposed upon him after his 1990 convictions violate recently articulated constitutional principles and, therefore, those sentences must be vacated. The district court denied Brown's motion. We will affirm.

ISSUES

[T2] Brown raises this issue:

Did the district court error and abuse its discretion by denying [Brown's] motion to correct his unconstitutional and therefore illegal sentences?

The State articulates…