Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE · CHAPTER 18. SENTENCE AND JUDGMENT · Part 2. Form of Sentence
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203 (2026)

Revocation Of Suspended Or Deferred Sentence

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 46
  3. CHAPTER 18
  4. Part 2
  5. 46-18-203 Revocation of suspended or deferred sentence

TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 18. SENTENCE AND JUDGMENT

Part 2. Form of Sentence

Revocation Of Suspended Or Deferred Sentence

46-18-203. Revocation of suspended or deferred sentence. (1) On the filing of a petition for revocation showing probable cause that the offender has violated any condition of a sentence, any condition of a deferred imposition of sentence, or any condition of supervision after release from imprisonment imposed pursuant to 45-5-503(4), 45-5-507(5), 45-5-601(3), 45-5-625(4), or 45-5-711, the judge may issue an order for a hearing on revocation. The order must require the offender to appear at a specified time and place for the hearing and be served by delivering a copy of the petition and order to the offender personally. The judge may also issue an arrest warrant directing any peace officer or a probation and parole officer to arrest the offender and bring the offender before the court.

(2) The petition for a revocation must be filed with the sentencing court or with a court as provided in subsection (3) either before the period of suspension or deferral has begun or during the period of suspension or deferral but not after the period has expired. Expiration of the period of suspension or deferral after the petition is filed does not deprive the court of its jurisdiction to rule on the petition.

(3) A county attorney in a county where the defendant is alleged to have committed a new felony offense may petition the sentencing court in a county where the defendant was sentenced to a suspended or deferred sentence in a prior felony conviction to transfer the matter to the county where the new felony is alleged to have been committed for revocation of the prior suspended or deferred sentence. The petition must be served on the county attorney in the original sentencing county, the sentencing judge in the sentencing jurisdiction of the prior felony conviction, any victims, and the defendant.

(4) The provisions pertaining to bail, as set forth in Title 46, chapter 9, are applicable to persons arrested pursuant to this section.

(5) Without unnecessary delay and no more than 60 days after arrest, the offender must be brought before the judge, and at least 10 days prior to the hearing the offender must be advised of:

(a) the allegations of the petition;

(b) the opportunity to appear and to present evidence in the offender's own behalf;

(c) the opportunity to question adverse witnesses; and

(d) the right to be represented by counsel at the revocation hearing pursuant to Title 46, chapter 8, part 1.

(6) A hearing is required before a suspended or deferred sentence can be revoked or the terms or conditions of the sentence can be modified unless:

(a) the offender admits the allegations and waives the right to a hearing; or

(b) the sentencing court, the probationer, or the county attorney in the sentencing jurisdiction has not objected to the removal of a condition of supervision pursuant to 46-23-1011 and the department of corrections notifies the victim of the change, using any available contact information at the time the other parties are notified; or

(c) the relief to be granted is favorable to the offender and the prosecutor, after having been given notice of the proposed relief and a reasonable opportunity to object, has not objected. An extension of the term of probation is not favorable to the offender for the purposes of this subsection (6)(c).

(7) (a) At the hearing, the prosecution shall prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there has been a violation of:

(i) the terms and conditions of the suspended or deferred sentence; or

(ii) a condition of supervision after release from imprisonment imposed pursuant to 45-5-503(4), 45-5-507(5), 45-5-601(3), 45-5-625(4), or 45-5-711.

(b) However, when a failure to pay restitution is the basis for the petition, the offender may excuse the violation by showing sufficient evidence that the failure to pay restitution was not attributable to a failure on the offender's part to make a good faith effort to obtain sufficient means to make the restitution payments as ordered.

(8) (a) If the judge finds that the offender has violated the terms and conditions of the suspended or deferred sentence by committing either a compliance violation or a noncompliance violation, or both, the judge may:

(i) continue the suspended or deferred sentence without a change in conditions;

(ii) continue the suspended sentence with modified or additional terms and conditions, which may include placement in:

(A) a secure facility designated by the department for up to 9 months; or

(B) a community corrections facility or program designated by the department for up to 9 months, including but not limited to placement in a prerelease center, sanction or hold bed, transitional living program, enhanced supervision program, relapse intervention bed, chemical dependency treatment, or 24/7 sobriety program;

(iii) revoke the suspension of sentence and require the offender to serve either the sentence imposed or any sentence that could have been imposed that does not include a longer imprisonment or commitment term than the original sentence. A sentence imposed upon revocation must run consecutively to any other previously existing sentence unless the suspended or deferred sentence that is being revoked ran concurrently to the previously existing sentence.

(iv) if the sentence was deferred, impose any sentence that might have been originally imposed.

(b) If a suspended or deferred sentence is revoked, the judge shall:

(i) consider any elapsed time, consult the records and recollection of the probation and parole officer, and allow all of the elapsed time served without any record or recollection of violations as a credit against the sentence. A district court, in its discretion, may deny elapsed time credit for a reasonable period of time related to a violation or multiple violations. A defendant is not entitled to elapsed time credit for time spent in a correctional institution as defined in 45-2-101. If the judge determines that elapsed time may not be credited, the judge shall state the reasons for the determination in the order.

(ii) allow credit for each day of incarceration or home arrest prior to imposition of a revocation sentence that is directly related to the revocation proceedings pursuant to the limitations in 46-18-403(1)(b).

(c) If the judge finds that the offender has not violated a term or condition of a suspended or deferred sentence, the judge is not prevented from setting, modifying, or adding conditions of probation as provided in 46-23-1011.

(9) If the judge finds that the prosecution has not proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there has been a violation of the terms and conditions of the suspended or deferred sentence, the petition must be dismissed and the offender, if in custody, must be immediately released.

(10) All sanction and placement decisions must be documented in the offender's file.

(11) As used in this section:

(a) "absconding" means when an offender deliberately makes the offender's whereabouts unknown to a probation and parole officer or fails to report for the purposes of avoiding supervision, and reasonable efforts by the probation and parole officer to locate the offender have been unsuccessful; and

(b) "compliance violation" means a violation of the conditions of supervision that is not:

(i) a new criminal offense;

(ii) possession of a firearm in violation of a condition of probation;

(iii) behavior by the offender or any person acting at the offender's direction that could be considered stalking, harassing, or threatening the victim of the offense or a member of the victim's immediate family or support network;

(iv) absconding; or

(v) failure to enroll in or complete a required sex offender treatment program or a treatment program designed to treat violent offenders.

(12) The provisions of this section apply to any offender whose suspended or deferred sentence is subject to revocation regardless of the date of the offender's conviction and regardless of the terms and conditions of the offender's original sentence.

(13) A filing fee of $120 must be filed with a petition for revocation when a transfer of jurisdiction is requested.

History: En. 95-2206 by Sec. 1, Ch. 196, L. 1967; rep. and re-en. by Sec. 31, Ch. 513, L. 1973; amd. Sec. 36, Ch. 184, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 436, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 580, L. 1977; amd. Sec. 12, Ch. 584, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 95-2206(5); amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 328, L. 1981; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 204, L. 1983; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 262, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 224, Ch. 800, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 45, Ch. 262, L. 1993; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 52, L. 1999; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 493, L. 2001; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 345, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 386, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 15, Ch. 483, L. 2007; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 230, L. 2011; amd. Sec. 10, Ch. 374, L. 2013; amd. Sec. 19, Ch. 285, L. 2015; amd. Sec. 13, Ch. 390, L. 2017; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 391, L. 2017; amd. Sec. 26, Ch. 167, L. 2023; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 530, L. 2023; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 324, L. 2025; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 356, L. 2025; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 498, L. 2025; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 624, L. 2025.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 300 cases (109 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: State v. Stiffarm, 2011 MT 9 (Mont. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Stiffarm, 2011 MT 9 (Mont. 2011). · cites it 92× “Section 46-18-203, MCA, was amended by the 1983 Legislature to add subsection (2) as a new subsection.”
State v. Tracy, 2005 MT 128 (Mont. 2005). · cites it 53× “¶15 The State asserts Tracy’s arguments must fail because the Legislature amended §46-18-203, MCA, in 2003 to permit a judge to impose additional restrictions when an offender has violated the terms and conditions of a suspended or deferred sentence as long as the *224 length of…”
State v. Joseph Morrison, 2008 MT 16 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 68× “1 Morrison also argued that the petition to revoke was untimely filed pursuant to § 46-18-203, MCA, because in order to revoke the five-year suspended sentence the petition must be “filed during the period of suspension.”
State v. C. Jardee, 2020 MT 81 (Mont. 2020). · cites it 32× “7 now point to an actual violation by the defendant, in the relevant time period, found in the record or recollection of the probation officer, to establish a basis for denial of street time credit for that period, here, between the release on bond and sentencing.”
State v. K. Pennington, 2022 MT 180 (Mont. 2022). · cites it 47× “¶25 Issue Two: Following revocation of a deferred sentence, is the offender entitled to credit for elapsed time prior to the revocation? ¶26 Any sentence imposed under subsection (7) of § 46-18-203, MCA, requires that the judge take four steps: first, “consider any elapsed…”
State v. Rozell R. Cook, 2012 MT 34 (Mont. 2012). · cites it 65× “¶9 Issue one: whether the District Court exceeded its statutory authority, in violation of § 46-18-203(2), MCA (1999), when it considered and granted the State’s petition to revoke Cook’s suspended sentence that was filed before the period of suspension had begun.”
State v. Triplett, 2008 MT 360 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 26× “¶17 Due process protections for a revocation hearing are codified in § 46-18-203, MCA, which provides, in pertinent part: (4) Without unnecessary delay, the offender must be brought before the judge, and the offender must be advised of: (a) the allegations of the petition; (b)…”
State v. White, 2008 MT 464 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 42× “See § 46-18-203(2), MCA (“The petition for a revocation must be filed with the sentencing court during the period of suspension or deferral.”
State v. Finley, 2003 MT 239 (Mont. 2003). · cites it 30× “On the other hand, when a probation officer authorizes the arrest and detention of *198 a probationer under § 46-23-1012(3), MCA, an intervention hearing must be held or bail set within 72 hours. ¶ 21 Finley distinguishes the circumstances of his re-revocation proceedings from…”
State v. West, 2008 MT 338 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 20× “West contends that the State "caused unnecessary delay and violated Mont.Code Ann. § 46-18-203 when it failed to serve West with the warrant for over two years.”
State v. Michael Letasky, 2007 MT 51 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 18× “The legislature did not list criminal contempt in § 46-18-203(7), MCA, as among the enumerated consequences that a court may impose upon an offender who violates a condition of his suspended sentence.”
State v. Youpee, 416 P.3d 1050 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 19× “Pursuant to § 46-18-203(7)(a)(iii), MCA, a district court may revoke a suspended sentence and "require the offender to serve either the sentence imposed or any sentence that could have been imposed that does not include a longer imprisonment or commitment term than the original…”
Show all 300 citing cases →
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(1) — 16 cases
State v. Docken, 908 P.2d 213 (Mont. 1995).
State v. Frazier, 2001 MT 210 (Mont. 2001).
State v. Burch, 2008 MT 118 (Mont. 2008).
State v. Ottwell, 784 P.2d 402 (Mont. 1989).
State v. Shockley, 2001 MT 180 (Mont. 2001).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(10)(b) — 2 cases
Ward v. Salmonsen (Mont. 2024).
Bokma v. Olsen (Mont. 2024).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(11) — 1 case
State v. M. Miller, 2023 MT 89N (Mont. 2023).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(11)(a) — 4 cases
State v. B. Fetveit, 2020 MT 264 (Mont. 2020).
State v. C. Headdress, 2024 MT 285N (Mont. 2024).
State v. S. Fjelsted, 2020 MT 278 (Mont. 2020).
Goldsmith v. Olson (Mont. 2024).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(11)(b) — 7 cases
City of Missoula v. F. Sadiku, 2021 MT 295 (Mont. 2021).
State v. K. Pennington, 2022 MT 180 (Mont. 2022). “¶25 Issue Two: Following revocation of a deferred sentence, is the offender entitled to credit for elapsed time prior to the revocation? ¶26 Any sentence imposed under subsection (7) of § 46-18-203, MCA, requires that the judge take four steps: first, “consider any elapsed…”
State v. S. Smith, 2024 MT 72N (Mont. 2024).
State v. B. Black, 2024 MT 128N (Mont. 2024).
Bokma v. Olsen, 2025 MT 37 (Mont. 2025).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(11)(b)(i) — 5 cases
State v. M. Howard, 2020 MT 279 (Mont. 2020).
City of Missoula v. F. Sadiku, 2021 MT 295 (Mont. 2021).
State v. M. Tippets, 2022 MT 81 (Mont. 2022).
Bokma v. Olsen, 2025 MT 37 (Mont. 2025).
Lausch v. Vaughn (Mont. 2023).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(11)(b)(ii) — 1 case
State v. W. Vasquez, 2021 MT 233N (Mont. 2021).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(12) — 4 cases
City of Missoula v. F. Sadiku, 2021 MT 295 (Mont. 2021).
Rood v. Laughlin (Mont. 2021).
Vaska v. Godfrey (Mont. 2025).
State v. C. Zielie, 2025 MT 90 (Mont. 2025).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(2) — 27 cases
State v. Stiffarm, 2011 MT 9 (Mont. 2011). “Section 46-18-203, MCA, was amended by the 1983 Legislature to add subsection (2) as a new subsection.”
State v. Rozell R. Cook, 2012 MT 34 (Mont. 2012). “¶9 Issue one: whether the District Court exceeded its statutory authority, in violation of § 46-18-203(2), MCA (1999), when it considered and granted the State’s petition to revoke Cook’s suspended sentence that was filed before the period of suspension had begun.”
State v. Joseph Morrison, 2008 MT 16 (Mont. 2008). “1 Morrison also argued that the petition to revoke was untimely filed pursuant to § 46-18-203, MCA, because in order to revoke the five-year suspended sentence the petition must be “filed during the period of suspension.”
State v. LeDEAU, 2009 MT 276 (Mont. 2009).
State v. Welling, 2002 MT 308 (Mont. 2002).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(3) — 3 cases
Gonzales v. Mahoney, 2001 MT 259 (Mont. 2001).
Boyd v. Anderson (Mont. 2021).
State v. Lum, 386 Mont. 14 (Mont. 2016).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(4) — 19 cases
State v. West, 2008 MT 338 (Mont. 2008). “West contends that the State "caused unnecessary delay and violated Mont.Code Ann. § 46-18-203 when it failed to serve West with the warrant for over two years.”
State v. Triplett, 2008 MT 360 (Mont. 2008). “¶17 Due process protections for a revocation hearing are codified in § 46-18-203, MCA, which provides, in pertinent part: (4) Without unnecessary delay, the offender must be brought before the judge, and the offender must be advised of: (a) the allegations of the petition; (b)…”
State v. Finley, 2003 MT 239 (Mont. 2003). “On the other hand, when a probation officer authorizes the arrest and detention of *198 a probationer under § 46-23-1012(3), MCA, an intervention hearing must be held or bail set within 72 hours. ¶ 21 Finley distinguishes the circumstances of his re-revocation proceedings from…”
State v. Johnston, 2008 MT 318 (Mont. 2008).
State v. Pedersen, 2003 MT 315 (Mont. 2003).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(4)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Johnston, 2008 MT 318 (Mont. 2008).
State v. Triplett, 2008 MT 360 (Mont. 2008). “¶17 Due process protections for a revocation hearing are codified in § 46-18-203, MCA, which provides, in pertinent part: (4) Without unnecessary delay, the offender must be brought before the judge, and the offender must be advised of: (a) the allegations of the petition; (b)…”
State v. J. Larson, 2023 MT 236 (Mont. 2023).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(4)(d) — 1 case
State v. Lambert, 2025 MT 286 (Mont. 2025).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(5) — 2 cases
M. Benton v. DJ Godfrey (Mont. 2025).
Lewis v. Alcohol Drug Serv. Of (Mont. 1995).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(5)(a) — 2 cases
State v. Finley, 2003 MT 239 (Mont. 2003). “On the other hand, when a probation officer authorizes the arrest and detention of *198 a probationer under § 46-23-1012(3), MCA, an intervention hearing must be held or bail set within 72 hours. ¶ 21 Finley distinguishes the circumstances of his re-revocation proceedings from…”
State v. A. LeDeau Jr., 2017 MT 265N (Mont. 2017).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(6) — 28 cases
State v. Finley, 2003 MT 239 (Mont. 2003). “On the other hand, when a probation officer authorizes the arrest and detention of *198 a probationer under § 46-23-1012(3), MCA, an intervention hearing must be held or bail set within 72 hours. ¶ 21 Finley distinguishes the circumstances of his re-revocation proceedings from…”
State v. Welling, 2002 MT 308 (Mont. 2002).
State v. Thaut, 2004 MT 359 (Mont. 2004).
State v. Pedersen, 2003 MT 315 (Mont. 2003).
State v. C. Jardee, 2020 MT 81 (Mont. 2020). “7 now point to an actual violation by the defendant, in the relevant time period, found in the record or recollection of the probation officer, to establish a basis for denial of street time credit for that period, here, between the release on bond and sentencing.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(6)(a) — 9 cases
State v. M. Howard, 2020 MT 279 (Mont. 2020).
State v. Osborn, 2015 MT 48 (Mont. 2015).
City of Missoula v. F. Sadiku, 2021 MT 295 (Mont. 2021).
State v. Sebastian, 2013 MT 347 (Mont. 2013).
State v. R. Sullivan, 2023 MT 4N (Mont. 2023).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(6)(a)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Johnson, 430 P.3d 494 (Mont. 2018).
State v. Timothy Carter, 2014 MT 211 (Mont. 2014).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(6)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Johnson, 430 P.3d 494 (Mont. 2018).
State v. N. Puccinelli, 2024 MT 114 (Mont. 2024).
State v. Powell, 2025 MT 218 (Mont. 2025).
State v. A. LeDeau Jr., 2017 MT 265N (Mont. 2017).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7) — 59 cases
State v. Michael Letasky, 2007 MT 51 (Mont. 2007). “The legislature did not list criminal contempt in § 46-18-203(7), MCA, as among the enumerated consequences that a court may impose upon an offender who violates a condition of his suspended sentence.”
State v. White, 2008 MT 464 (Mont. 2008). “See § 46-18-203(2), MCA (“The petition for a revocation must be filed with the sentencing court during the period of suspension or deferral.”
State v. Seals, 2007 MT 71 (Mont. 2007).
State v. Oie, 2007 MT 328 (Mont. 2007).
State v. K. Pennington, 2022 MT 180 (Mont. 2022). “¶25 Issue Two: Following revocation of a deferred sentence, is the offender entitled to credit for elapsed time prior to the revocation? ¶26 Any sentence imposed under subsection (7) of § 46-18-203, MCA, requires that the judge take four steps: first, “consider any elapsed…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(1)(iii) — 1 case
State v. Eblen, 377 Mont. 7 (Mont. 2014).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(a) — 23 cases
State v. Tracy, 2005 MT 128 (Mont. 2005). “¶15 The State asserts Tracy’s arguments must fail because the Legislature amended §46-18-203, MCA, in 2003 to permit a judge to impose additional restrictions when an offender has violated the terms and conditions of a suspended or deferred sentence as long as the *224 length of…”
State v. Burke, 2005 MT 250 (Mont. 2005).
State v. Welling, 2002 MT 308 (Mont. 2002).
State v. Rudolph, 2005 MT 41 (Mont. 2005).
State v. White, 2008 MT 464 (Mont. 2008). “See § 46-18-203(2), MCA (“The petition for a revocation must be filed with the sentencing court during the period of suspension or deferral.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(a)(3) — 1 case
State v. R. Bettin, 2020 MT 243N (Mont. 2020).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(a)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Knudson, 182 P.3d 762 (Mont. 2008).
State v. Lauretta Wilder, 2011 MT 146N (Mont. 2011).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(a)(ii) — 4 cases
State v. Striplin, 2009 MT 76 (Mont. 2009).
State v. Rozell R. Cook, 2012 MT 34 (Mont. 2012). “¶9 Issue one: whether the District Court exceeded its statutory authority, in violation of § 46-18-203(2), MCA (1999), when it considered and granted the State’s petition to revoke Cook’s suspended sentence that was filed before the period of suspension had begun.”
Mascarena v. Lt. Valdez (Mont. 2022).
State v. Knudson, 182 P.3d 762 (Mont. 2008).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(a)(ii)(A) — 2 cases
State v. C. Toulouse, 2024 MT 184 (Mont. 2024).
Mascarena v. Lt. Valdez (Mont. 2022).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(a)(iii) — 62 cases
State v. Youpee, 416 P.3d 1050 (Mont. 2018). “Pursuant to § 46-18-203(7)(a)(iii), MCA, a district court may revoke a suspended sentence and "require the offender to serve either the sentence imposed or any sentence that could have been imposed that does not include a longer imprisonment or commitment term than the original…”
State v. Tracy, 2005 MT 128 (Mont. 2005). “¶15 The State asserts Tracy’s arguments must fail because the Legislature amended §46-18-203, MCA, in 2003 to permit a judge to impose additional restrictions when an offender has violated the terms and conditions of a suspended or deferred sentence as long as the *224 length of…”
State v. Rozell R. Cook, 2012 MT 34 (Mont. 2012). “¶9 Issue one: whether the District Court exceeded its statutory authority, in violation of § 46-18-203(2), MCA (1999), when it considered and granted the State’s petition to revoke Cook’s suspended sentence that was filed before the period of suspension had begun.”
State v. Triplett, 2008 MT 360 (Mont. 2008). “¶17 Due process protections for a revocation hearing are codified in § 46-18-203, MCA, which provides, in pertinent part: (4) Without unnecessary delay, the offender must be brought before the judge, and the offender must be advised of: (a) the allegations of the petition; (b)…”
State v. V. Johnson, 2022 MT 216 (Mont. 2022).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(a)(iv) — 8 cases
State v. K. Pennington, 2022 MT 180 (Mont. 2022). “¶25 Issue Two: Following revocation of a deferred sentence, is the offender entitled to credit for elapsed time prior to the revocation? ¶26 Any sentence imposed under subsection (7) of § 46-18-203, MCA, requires that the judge take four steps: first, “consider any elapsed…”
State v. T.Thibeault, 2021 MT 162 (Mont. 2021).
In Re S.m.k.-s.h., 2012 MT 281 (Mont. 2012).
T. Lozeau, Sr. v. Cpt. Kowalski (Mont. 2020).
State v. N. McGuire, 2024 MT 104N (Mont. 2024).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(b) — 85 cases
State v. C. Jardee, 2020 MT 81 (Mont. 2020). “7 now point to an actual violation by the defendant, in the relevant time period, found in the record or recollection of the probation officer, to establish a basis for denial of street time credit for that period, here, between the release on bond and sentencing.”
State v. Tracy, 2005 MT 128 (Mont. 2005). “¶15 The State asserts Tracy’s arguments must fail because the Legislature amended §46-18-203, MCA, in 2003 to permit a judge to impose additional restrictions when an offender has violated the terms and conditions of a suspended or deferred sentence as long as the *224 length of…”
State v. Youpee, 416 P.3d 1050 (Mont. 2018). “Pursuant to § 46-18-203(7)(a)(iii), MCA, a district court may revoke a suspended sentence and "require the offender to serve either the sentence imposed or any sentence that could have been imposed that does not include a longer imprisonment or commitment term than the original…”
State v. K. Pennington, 2022 MT 180 (Mont. 2022). “¶25 Issue Two: Following revocation of a deferred sentence, is the offender entitled to credit for elapsed time prior to the revocation? ¶26 Any sentence imposed under subsection (7) of § 46-18-203, MCA, requires that the judge take four steps: first, “consider any elapsed…”
State v. G. Makarchuk, 2009 MT 82 (Mont. 2009).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(b)(2017) — 1 case
State v. E. Ness (Mont. 2020).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(c) — 12 cases
State v. White, 2008 MT 464 (Mont. 2008). “See § 46-18-203(2), MCA (“The petition for a revocation must be filed with the sentencing court during the period of suspension or deferral.”
State v. Tracy, 2005 MT 128 (Mont. 2005). “¶15 The State asserts Tracy’s arguments must fail because the Legislature amended §46-18-203, MCA, in 2003 to permit a judge to impose additional restrictions when an offender has violated the terms and conditions of a suspended or deferred sentence as long as the *224 length of…”
State v. Tirey, 247 P.3d 701 (Mont. 2011).
State v. Richardson, 2000 MT 72 (Mont. 2000).
State v. Seals, 2007 MT 71 (Mont. 2007).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(d) — 1 case
R. Gillingham v. Salmonsen (Mont. 2021).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7)(iii) — 1 case
State v. Lesmeister, 2000 MT 318 (Mont. 2000).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(7Xb) — 1 case
State v. Hoover, 377 Mont. 87 (Mont. 2014).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(8) — 8 cases
State v. K. Pennington, 2022 MT 180 (Mont. 2022). “¶25 Issue Two: Following revocation of a deferred sentence, is the offender entitled to credit for elapsed time prior to the revocation? ¶26 Any sentence imposed under subsection (7) of § 46-18-203, MCA, requires that the judge take four steps: first, “consider any elapsed…”
State v. M. Tippets, 2022 MT 81 (Mont. 2022).
State v. N. Puccinelli, 2024 MT 114 (Mont. 2024).
State v. M. Tippets (Mont. 2022).
State v. S. Smith, 2024 MT 72N (Mont. 2024).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(8)(a) — 2 cases
State v. N. Puccinelli, 2024 MT 114 (Mont. 2024).
State v. S. Fjelsted, 2020 MT 278 (Mont. 2020).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(8)(b) — 1 case
City of Missoula v. F. Sadiku, 2021 MT 295 (Mont. 2021).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(8)(c) — 9 cases
State v. K. Pennington, 2022 MT 180 (Mont. 2022). “¶25 Issue Two: Following revocation of a deferred sentence, is the offender entitled to credit for elapsed time prior to the revocation? ¶26 Any sentence imposed under subsection (7) of § 46-18-203, MCA, requires that the judge take four steps: first, “consider any elapsed…”
State v. N. Puccinelli, 2024 MT 114 (Mont. 2024).
State v. S. Smith, 2024 MT 72N (Mont. 2024).
State v. M. Miller, 2023 MT 89N (Mont. 2023).
Wells v. Harbaugh (Mont. 2020).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(9) — 11 cases
State v. Tracy, 2005 MT 128 (Mont. 2005). “¶15 The State asserts Tracy’s arguments must fail because the Legislature amended §46-18-203, MCA, in 2003 to permit a judge to impose additional restrictions when an offender has violated the terms and conditions of a suspended or deferred sentence as long as the *224 length of…”
State v. Striplin, 2009 MT 76 (Mont. 2009).
State v. James Piller, 2014 MT 342 (Mont. 2014).
State v. Goff, 2011 MT 6 (Mont. 2011).
State v. R. Laedeke, 2020 MT 275N (Mont. 2020).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(b) — 3 cases
State v. Frazier, 340 Mont. 85 (Mont. 2007).
State v. Frazier, 340 Mont. 88 (Mont. 2007).
State v. Frazier, 340 Mont. 90 (Mont. 2007).
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-203(d) — 1 case
State v. Heath, 2004 MT 58 (Mont. 2004).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.