State v. Munk, 453 N.W.2d 124 (S.D. 1990)

Cases | State v. Munk, 453 N.W.2d 124 (S.D. 1990) | 2018

The defendant pled guilty to uttering a no account check. Though the State requested full restitution, the trial court failed to mention restitution by oversight. The written judgment ordered the defendant to pay restitution. The defendant filed a motion to modify the judgment because it did not conform to the oral sentence, then filed a notice of appeal before the trial court could rule on the motion. The supreme court affirmed the judgment. Though the oral sentence was not ambiguous and the written judgment clearly did not conform to it, the defendant specifically agreed to make restitution in exchange for dismissal of five felony counts of uttering no-account checks. The defendant received the benefit of the bargain and it was not improper for the trial court to require that he fulfill his part of the agreement.