Segnitz v. State

MACY, Justice.

Appellant Donald L. Segnitz appeals from the denials of two motions he filed in two separate courts to correct his illegal sentences. The cases were consolidated for purposes of appeal.

We affirm in part and reverse in part.

ISSUES

In Case No. 99-223, Segnitz presents the following issues for our review:

1. Did the District Court [err] by denying Appellant's Motion to Correct an Illegal Sentence, which was filed because while orally sentenced to concurrent sentences, the Written Judgement and Sentence, and Mitimus failed to stipulate that 'sentence was concurrent[?]

2. Did the…