We apply a two-tiered standard of review to a criminal sentence that does not qualify under statute for review by the Sentence Review Division because the sentence does not impose at least one year of actual incarceration. We review de novo whether the court had statutory authority to impose the sentence, whether the sentence falls within the applicable sentencing parameters, and whether the court adhered to the mandates of the applicable sentencing statutes. We next review the district court's sentence for an abuse of discretion. State v. McMaster, 2008 MT 268, ¶ 20, 345 Mont. 172, 190 P.3d 302.
The proper basis by which this Court may review a challenge to a decision of the Sentence Review Division is through a petition for extraordinary relief. Because the Sentence Review Division functions as an arm of this Court, this Court has the supervisory authority to ensure that it complies with statutes and rules governing its operations as well as the Montana Constitution and the United States Constitution. Pursuant to M. R. App. P. 14(1), this Court has the power to hear and determine such original and remedial writs as may be necessary or proper to the complete exercise of its jurisdiction. Driver v. Sentence Review Div. in the Supreme Court of Mont., 2010 MT 43, ¶ 9, 355 Mont. 273, 227 P.3d 1018.
We review a criminal sentence for legality only. We consider whether the sentence falls within the parameters set by the applicable sentencing statutes. We leave equitable claims to the Sentence Review Division. State v. Habets, 2011 MT 275, ¶ 12, 362 Mont. 406, 264 P.3d 1139.