Ortiz-Bedolla v. State

Summary

The Court affirmed the denial of Ortiz-Bedolla's untimely motion to modify his sentence. It held that the vagueness challenge was not preserved and, in any event, that the sentence-modification rule does not implicate unconstitutional vagueness; it also rejected his arguments concerning the treatment program and an alleged assurance by the Superior Court. The Court explained that the treatment program affected the level of supervision, not the length or validity of the sentence, and that the missing hearing transcript prevented review of the alleged assurance.