State v. Juiliano

Summary

The court affirmed the denial of Juiliano's motion to correct an illegal sentence. It held that the sentencing judge's oral pronouncement, viewed in the context of the entire hearing, imposed a valid hard 40 sentence despite imprecise wording. The court further held that challenges to the aggravating-factor determination and omissions in the sentencing journal entry were procedural complaints outside the limited scope of an illegal-sentence motion.