Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE · CHAPTER 20. APPEALS · Part 7. Action by Court
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 46-20-703 (2026)

Action Reviewing Court May Take

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 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 20
  4. Part 7
  5. 46-20-703 Action reviewing court may take

TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 20. APPEALS

Part 7. Action by Court

Action Reviewing Court May Take

46-20-703. Action reviewing court may take. On appeal the reviewing court may:

(1) reverse, affirm, or modify the judgment or order from which the appeal is taken;

(2) set aside, affirm, or modify any or all of the proceedings subsequent to or dependent upon the judgment or order from which the appeal is taken;

(3) reduce the offense of which the appellant was convicted to a lesser included offense;

(4) reduce the punishment imposed by the trial court; or

(5) order a new trial if justice so requires.

History: En. 95-2426 by Sec. 1, Ch. 196, L. 1967; amd. Sec. 42, Ch. 184, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 95-2426.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1980–2018 · leading case: State v. Sunday, 609 P.2d 1188 (Mont. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Sunday, 609 P.2d 1188 (Mont. 1980). · cites it 12× “Accordingly, under section 46-20-703, MCA, we reduce Sunday's sentence for burglary to 10 years in the state penitentiary with the other provisions of the sentence to remain unchanged.”
State v. Stevens, 2002 MT 181, 53 P.3d 356. · cites it 14× “We therefore reverse that portion of the District Court's judgment determining that Stevens was guilty of the offense of sexual intercourse without consent with respect to Jody and Erin.”
State v. Forsythe, 2017 MT 61, 390 P.3d 931. · cites it 10× “¶51 Did the District Court impose an illegal sentence by ordering Forsythe to pay a $20 information technology surcharge? ¶52 Lastly, the State concedes that the District Court imposed an illegal sentence when it ordered Forsythe to pay a $20 information technology surcharge…”
State v. Lundblade, 717 P.2d 575 (Mont. 1986). · cites it 6× “Section 46-20-703, MCA, sets out the actions we may take on review of a criminal appeal.”
State v. New, 917 P.2d 919 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 4× “Thus, pursuant to this Court's authority under § 46-20-703(1), MCA, we modify the District Court's judgment and sentence removing the reference to Count II, felony criminal possession of dangerous drugs (Lortab) pursuant to § 45-9-102, MCA.”
Silvestrone v. Park Cnty., 2007 MT 261, 170 P.3d 950. · cites it 3× “Section 46-20-703, MCA. The failure of the Park County courts and personnel to remand the matter to the Justice Court constitutes an omission as opposed to an affirmative judicial act.”
State v. Ray, 2003 MT 171, 71 P.3d 1247. · cites it 2× “3d 356, ¶ 54 ; § 46-20-703(3), MCA. As the State met all the other elements for burglary in this case, we hold that Ray’s conviction for aggravated burglary is hereby reduced to burglary and we remand to the District Court for resentencing on this conviction.”
State v. McGuire, 860 P.2d 148 (Mont. 1993). · cites it 3× “Section 46-20-703, MCA. Because we have determined that the District Court in Flathead County exceeded its sentencing authority, we modify the judgment and sentence by striking the provision ordering McGuire’s sentence to be consecutive to one not yet imposed in Gallatin County,…”
State v. W. Stewart Jr., 2018 MT 52N. · cites it 2× “Pursuant to our authority under § 46-20-703(1), MCA, we modify the District Court’s judgment and order Stewart’s ten-year sentence in a prison designated by the Montana Department of Corrections to run concurrently with, not consecutively to, his sentence imposed in the U.”
State v. Hancock, 2016 MT 21, 364 P.3d 1258. · cites it 2× “¶15 Issue Two: Did the District Court err by stating that Hancock was convicted of a DUI rather than a DUI per se? ¶16 Pursuant to § 46-20-703, MCA, this Court may “modify the judgment or order” that originated the appeal.”
City of Hamilton v. Roche, No. 95-526 (Mont. June 20, 1996). · cites it 2× “While Roche failed to object at trial or on appeal to the specific errors noted above, § 46-20-703(4), MCA, allows this Court to reduce the punishment imposed by the trial court.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 46-20-703(1): 3 cases
State v. Forsythe, 2017 MT 61, 390 P.3d 931. “¶51 Did the District Court impose an illegal sentence by ordering Forsythe to pay a $20 information technology surcharge? ¶52 Lastly, the State concedes that the District Court imposed an illegal sentence when it ordered Forsythe to pay a $20 information technology surcharge…”
State v. New, 917 P.2d 919 (Mont. 1996). “Thus, pursuant to this Court's authority under § 46-20-703(1), MCA, we modify the District Court's judgment and sentence removing the reference to Count II, felony criminal possession of dangerous drugs (Lortab) pursuant to § 45-9-102, MCA.”
State v. W. Stewart Jr., 2018 MT 52N. “Pursuant to our authority under § 46-20-703(1), MCA, we modify the District Court’s judgment and order Stewart’s ten-year sentence in a prison designated by the Montana Department of Corrections to run concurrently with, not consecutively to, his sentence imposed in the U.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 46-20-703(3): 2 cases
State v. Stevens, 2002 MT 181, 53 P.3d 356. “We therefore reverse that portion of the District Court's judgment determining that Stevens was guilty of the offense of sexual intercourse without consent with respect to Jody and Erin.”
State v. Ray, 2003 MT 171, 71 P.3d 1247. “3d 356, ¶ 54 ; § 46-20-703(3), MCA. As the State met all the other elements for burglary in this case, we hold that Ray’s conviction for aggravated burglary is hereby reduced to burglary and we remand to the District Court for resentencing on this conviction.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 46-20-703(4): 1 case
City of Hamilton v. Roche, No. 95-526 (Mont. June 20, 1996). “While Roche failed to object at trial or on appeal to the specific errors noted above, § 46-20-703(4), MCA, allows this Court to reduce the punishment imposed by the trial court.”
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.