Sentencing for violating a PPO; Consecutive sentencing; Moot issue

Given that respondent had already served the consecutive sentences that she challenged on appeal, the court dismissed her appeal as moot. She committed multiple violations of a PPO petitioner (her mother) had obtained against her. When it sentenced her in 2019, “the trial court ordered her to serve 93 days in jail for a previously suspended sentence, and 93 days in jail for the latest violation” consecutively, rather than concurrently. The consecutive nature of the sentencing was her only issue on appeal. The court noted that even if it concluded that the trial court erred (an issue it did not reach), it could not undo the time respondent had served. Further, she did not identify “any collateral legal consequences that she will suffer due solely to the consecutive nature of the sentences. A decision on the merits by this Court would have no practical effect on the case, and it is well established that this Court will not decide a moot issue.” It also declined to apply any of the exceptions to the mootness doctrine.