 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Alvin v. State3/8/2002
Michael M. Alvin was convicted of criminally negligent homicide, failure to render assistance at the scene of an injury accident, and driving while intoxicated. When Superior Court Judge Larry D. Card sentenced Alvin for these crimes, he declared that "[Alvin's] permit to drive any vehicle is hereby revoked for life. shall not ever drive a motor vehicle again." However, Judge Card said this during his announcement of Alvin's conditions of probation, and he in fact referred to the license revocation as "[Condition] Number 10".
The question is whether Judge Card imposed the revocation of Alvin's license as a condition of probation or as a direct component of Alvin's sentence. The answer makes a substantial difference in the sentence. If the license revocation is a condition of probation, then it operates only during the 10-year term of Alvin's probation. If, on the other hand, it is a direct component of the sentence, then Alvin's driver's license is revoked for life.
We conclude that Judge Card's sentencing remarks demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that he intended to bar Alvin from ever again driving a motor vehicle - a result that could be achieved only if the license revocation was a direct component of Alvin's sentence. We thus conclude that Judge Card made an objectively ascertainable mistake when he referred to the license revocation as a condition of Alvin's probation.
Underlying facts: the imposition of sentence, the ensuing written judgment, and Alvin's later motion to modify the written judgment
On September 25, 1996, Alvin appeared for sentencing in front of Judge Card. After Judge Card announced the terms of imprisonment for Alvin's two felonies (negligent homicide and leaving the scene of an injury accident), the judge then stated that he was "going to follow the recommendations [of the pre-sentence investigator]" and impose special conditions of probation "in addition to the general conditions ... normally associated with probation."
Judge Card then began reciting these special conditions of probation. The pre-sentence investigator had proposed ten special conditions of probation, and Judge Card initially started to impose conditions from the list contained in the pre-sentence report. But when he got to Condition Number 6 - which read: "Not drive unless insured and provide proof of insurance to the Probation / Parole Officer" -Judge Card said:
The Court: Number 6, not drive unless you're insured. Let me take that back. Excuse me. Disregard Number 6. I'll come back to that in a second.
Judge Card then announced a new "[Condition] Number 6" that tracked the language of the pre-sentence investigator's proposed Condition Number 7 ("obtain a substance abuse evaluation while in custody and participate in treatment as recommended by the program"). In other words, Judge Card omitted the pre-sentence investigator's proposed Condition Number 6 and skipped ahead to the next proposed condition, re-numbering the list. Proceeding in this fashion, Judge Card imposed all the remaining conditions proposed by the pre-sentence investigator. The judge numbered these conditions "7", "8", and "9" (instead of "8", "9", and "10" - the numbers given to them in the pre-sentence report).
After he had done this, Judge Card returned to the subject of Alvin's driver's license:
The Court: Number 10: Your permit to drive any vehicle is hereby revoked for life. You shall not ever drive a motor vehicle again.
This statement concluded Judge Card's imposition of sentence on Alvin's felonies. He then addressed Alvin's remaining conviction (the misdemeanor conviction for driving while into
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|