Per Curiam.
[¶ 1] Paul E. Palmer appeals from the order denying his N.D.R.Crim.P. 35, motion to correct an illegal sentence, seeking a reversal of this Court's prior decisions concerning N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6). Palmer also argues the legislative intent of N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6) shows a longer sentence was not intended to be permissible and that application of the statute in such a manner is constitutionally void for vagueness and ambiguity.
[¶ 2] We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). State v. Lindgren, 483 N.W.2d 777, 779 (N.D. 1992) (holding N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(5) as amended (currently codified at N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-07(6)) authorizes a trial court to re-sentence a defendant who violates a condition of probation to any sentence initially available); see also City of Bismarck v. Uhden, 513 N.W.2d 373, 376 (N.D. 1994) (recognizing that "[w]here courts of this State have construed statute and such construction is supported by the long acquiescence on the part of the legislative assembly and by the failure of the assembly to amend the law, it will be presumed that such interpretation of the statute is in accordance with legislative intent").
[¶ 3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. William A. Neumann Dale V. Sandstrom Carol Ronning Kapsner Mary Muehlen Maring