State v. Harris

¶ 1. Wayne P Harris appeals from the denial of his postrevocation motion challenging his reconfinement sentence on the basis that the court *482relied on inaccurate information when sentencing him.1 Although the facts the court used were mostly consistent with the department of corrections (DOC) revocation summary, Harris argues that the summary itself, taken as a whole, was an inaccurate portrayal of his extended supervision record. At the hearing, Harris's reconfinement counsel attempted to give some context to the summary, but it was postrevocation counsel who really brought objective evidence…