Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

In this case, the defendant, Justin Dean Kalina, was convicted by a jury of Violation of a Protective Order – Second Offense, Assault with a Weapon, and Tampering with Witnesses and Informants. The events leading to these charges occurred in late 2019 and October 2020, involving Kalina's former girlfriend, Kim Field, and her friend Stacy Butts. Kalina violated a protective order by approaching Field at a bar and later assaulted Stacy with a weapon after a confrontation at Stacy's house. Kalina also tampered with a witness by instructing his friend Jessica Foote to prepare a statement matching his version of events.The Thirteenth Judicial District Court of Yellowstone County presided over the trial. Kalina filed several post-trial motions, including motions to dismiss the Assault with a Weapon charge, suppress evidence, and for a new trial, all of which were denied by the District Court. Kalina also moved to enforce a pretrial plea offer, which the District Court rejected, and argued that the court imposed a "trial tax" by sentencing him more harshly than the plea offer. Additionally, Kalina claimed ineffective assistance of counsel.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case. The court held that sufficient evidence existed to sustain Kalina's conviction for Assault with a Weapon, as a rational juror could have found that Kalina's use of force was not justified. The court also found that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in declining to instruct the jury on the defense of Use of Force in Defense of an Occupied Structure, as Kalina's car did not meet the definition of an occupied structure. The court upheld the admission of Kalina's past assault convictions, ruling that Kalina had "opened the door" to this evidence by testifying about his lack of prior violent encounters.The court further held that the District Court did not err in denying Kalina's requests for evidentiary hearings on his motions to dismiss, suppress evidence, and for a new trial. The court found that Kalina's trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance and that the District Court did not impose a "trial tax" in sentencing. Finally, the court affirmed the District Court's denial of Kalina's second motion for a new trial, finding substantial compliance with jury selection statutes. The Supreme Court of Montana affirmed the District Court's judgment. View "State v. Kalina" on Justia Law

In July 2020, Sanders County Sheriff’s deputies responded to a shooting incident involving Michel Scott Dulaney and his neighbor, Edgar Torrey. Torrey was shot during an altercation, and Dulaney was arrested after initially denying involvement but later claiming self-defense. Dulaney was charged with three counts of attempted deliberate homicide, and he asserted a justifiable use of force defense.The Montana Twentieth Judicial District Court, Sanders County, presided over the case. The court excluded the testimony of Dulaney’s expert witness, Gary Marbut, who was to testify about self-defense and the mechanics of the shooting. The court also ruled that Dulaney had to testify and admit to acting purposely and knowingly to assert his justification defense. Dulaney was found guilty on all counts by a jury.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case. The court held that the District Court did not err in requiring Dulaney to provide evidence that he acted purposely and knowingly to assert his justifiable use of force defense. The court clarified that while Dulaney had to concede purposeful and knowing conduct, he did not have to admit to intending to commit deliberate homicide. The court also found no abuse of discretion in excluding Marbut’s testimony, as the jury could understand the circumstances without expert explanation. Finally, the court affirmed the denial of Dulaney’s post-verdict motion for a new trial or judgment of acquittal, concluding that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s verdict. View "State v. M. Dulaney" on Justia Law

In August 2021, the State of Montana charged Kordy Lee Denny with three offenses: Partner Family Member Strangulation (a felony), Partner Family Member Assault (a misdemeanor), and Destruction/Tampering with a Communication Device (a misdemeanor). Denny allegedly strangled his ex-wife, took her phone when she tried to call 911, and punched her in the face. Denny pleaded not guilty to all charges. In December 2022, Denny agreed to plead guilty to the two misdemeanors in exchange for the dismissal of the felony charge and the State's sentencing recommendation.The Montana Eighth Judicial District Court accepted Denny's nolo contendere pleas to the misdemeanors but ordered a presentence investigation (PSI) report, despite objections from both the defense and the State. The court argued that the PSI was necessary due to the original felony charge. Denny failed to comply with the PSI process, leading the State to argue that this non-cooperation converted the plea agreement from binding to non-binding, allowing the State to recommend a harsher sentence. The District Court sentenced Denny to a one-year jail term with all but 120 days suspended for the assault charge and a consecutive six-month suspended jail term for the communication device charge.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case and held that the District Court erred in ordering a PSI for the misdemeanors, as they were not originally charged as sexual or violent felonies. The court found that the plea agreement's requirement for Denny to cooperate with the PSI was unlawful and void. Consequently, the State breached the plea agreement by recommending a harsher sentence. The Supreme Court reversed Denny's judgment and sentence, remanding the case for resentencing in accordance with the original plea agreement. The court also ordered the PSI report to be destroyed and stricken from the record. View "State v. Denny" on Justia Law

On September 10, 2022, a Montana Highway Patrol Trooper stopped Kyler Austin Clinkenbeard for speeding. The Trooper detected alcohol on Clinkenbeard’s breath, and Clinkenbeard admitted to drinking three beers. He failed field sobriety tests, and a preliminary breath test showed a .130 blood alcohol concentration. Clinkenbeard was arrested and refused a blood test, prompting the Trooper to obtain a search warrant. The blood test revealed a .101 blood alcohol concentration. Clinkenbeard was charged with DUI (first offense) and speeding.Clinkenbeard filed a motion to suppress the blood test results and dismiss the charges in Ravalli County Justice Court, arguing a Brady violation, outrageous government conduct, illegal blood draw location, and that the State was precluded from seeking a blood test warrant for first-time DUI suspects. The Justice Court denied the motion, and Clinkenbeard pleaded guilty to both charges, reserving the right to appeal the suppression motion denial. The District Court also denied the motion after an evidentiary hearing.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case. Clinkenbeard argued that the implied consent statute (§ 61-8-1016(4)(a), MCA) prohibited obtaining a search warrant for a blood test for first-time DUI offenders. The Court held that subsection (5) of the same statute allows for obtaining a search warrant, stating that the implied consent statute does not apply to tests performed pursuant to a search warrant. The Court affirmed the District Court’s decision, allowing the use of the blood test obtained through the search warrant. View "State v. Clinkenbeard" on Justia Law

Leroy Charles was initially charged with aggravated assault, criminal endangerment, and aggravated kidnapping. He pled guilty to an amended charge of criminal endangerment in exchange for the dismissal of the other charges. He was sentenced to eight years with four suspended in the Department of Corrections (DOC) and granted 189 days of credit for time served. Charles began the suspended portion of his sentence on February 14, 2021, and complied with supervision requirements for over a year. However, on October 21, 2022, the DOC filed a report of violation (ROV) accusing him of multiple compliance violations, including methamphetamine use and failure to report for drug testing.The Twentieth Judicial District Court, Lake County, revoked Charles's suspended sentence and imposed a four-year sentence, all suspended, to the DOC. The court granted 487 days of credit for street time but denied his request for additional credit for the elapsed time between the filing of the ROV and the dispositional hearing on May 3, 2023. Charles appealed this decision.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case. The court found that Charles was entitled to credit for the elapsed time from December 1, 2022, to May 3, 2023, as there were no recorded violations during this period, and he had complied with probation requirements. The court also determined that Charles should receive credit for any time he was incarcerated from November 9, 2022, to November 30, 2022, and from December 19, 2022, to May 3, 2023. Additionally, the court confirmed that Charles was entitled to street time credit from February 14, 2021, to June 6, 2022.The Supreme Court reversed the District Court's decision and remanded the case to amend its judgment to include the correct calculations for elapsed time, time spent incarcerated, and street time credit. View "State v. Charles" on Justia Law

Bradley Hillious was charged with deliberate homicide for the death of his wife, Amanda, who was found unresponsive at the bottom of a staircase and later died from strangulation and blunt-force injuries. Prior to trial, Hillious sought to exclude certain statements Amanda made before her death, including a petition for a temporary order of protection (TOP) and text messages to a coworker. The District Court denied the motion to exclude the TOP petition and deferred ruling on the text messages until trial.The Eleventh Judicial District Court in Flathead County convicted Hillious of deliberate homicide. Hillious filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that the jury panel was improperly assembled because the clerk did not certify non-responding jurors to the sheriff for personal service, as required by Montana law. The District Court denied the motion, finding that the clerk's method of jury selection did not undermine the randomness or objectivity of the process.The Montana Supreme Court reviewed the case and affirmed the District Court's judgment. The Court held that the clerk's failure to certify non-responding jurors for personal service was a technical violation that did not affect the randomness or objectivity of the jury selection process. The Court also found that Hillious's motion for a new trial was untimely and that he failed to show good cause for the delay. Additionally, the Court held that the admission of the TOP petition violated Hillious's Confrontation Clause rights but concluded that the error was harmless given the other evidence presented at trial. View "State v. Hillious" on Justia Law

Loren Dean Raver was pulled over while driving a stolen Ford F-150 and subsequently arrested. The truck's owner, Stacie Grandpre, confirmed that she did not know Raver and had not given him permission to drive her truck. Upon searching the vehicle, deputies found syringes, a spoon with a crystalline substance, and stolen copper wire and tools. Raver was charged with multiple counts, including felony theft and misdemeanors. He entered a no contest plea for felony theft and misdemeanor theft of the copper wire, and the other charges were dropped.The Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, held a sentencing hearing where the State requested $17,470.36 in restitution for Grandpre's losses, including vehicle damage, hunting gear, car rentals, and cleaning costs. The State presented testimony from a State Farm Insurance claims specialist, who attributed the damages to the theft based on Grandpre's statements and the investigation. Raver, a mechanic, contested the amount, claiming the truck had no issues during his possession and proposed a lower restitution amount.The District Court ordered the full restitution amount, finding a reasonable connection between the damage and Raver's theft. The court found the State's evidence credible and Raver's testimony not credible. Raver appealed, arguing insufficient causation and challenging the inclusion of the bumper replacement cost.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case and affirmed the District Court's decision. The court found that the evidence presented, including the State Farm investigation and Grandpre's statements, supported the restitution amount by a preponderance of the evidence. The court also rejected Raver's argument regarding the bumper, as there was insufficient evidence to refute the State Farm conclusion. View "State v. Raver" on Justia Law

Thomas Joseph Brennan was charged with four counts of felony sexual assault and one count of felony sexual abuse of children. His 14-year-old stepdaughter, A.H., disclosed that Brennan habitually entered her bedroom to watch her change clothes and touched her inappropriately. A.H. testified that Brennan's behavior became intrusive and invasive, including "snuggling" with her in bed and touching her inappropriately. A.H.'s grandmother and mother provided corroborating testimony. Brennan denied the allegations but admitted to some of the physical contact described by A.H.The jury found Brennan not guilty of the four counts of sexual assault but guilty of the one count of sexual abuse of children. Brennan moved for a new trial, arguing that the conduct established at trial did not constitute sexual abuse of children under the relevant statute. The District Court agreed, finding insufficient evidence to uphold the jury's verdict and granted Brennan's motion for a new trial, dismissing the conviction.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case and reversed the District Court's decision. The court held that Brennan's conduct of watching A.H. change clothes constituted a "lewd exhibition" and a "depiction" of a child in a state of partial undress for the purpose of his own sexual gratification or to humiliate A.H. The court found that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict and instructed the District Court to reinstate Brennan's conviction for sexual abuse of children. View "State v. Brennan" on Justia Law

Kevin Charles Walla was charged with Deliberate Homicide after shooting and killing Richard Allen Bowers in his apartment on December 31, 2019. Walla claimed he acted in self-defense, citing Bowers' history of drug use, criminal behavior, and aggression. The State sought to exclude Walla's testimony about Bowers' character. During the trial, the parties reached an agreement on certain evidentiary disputes and jury instructions, including a provision allowing Walla's counsel to make an offer of proof about Walla's testimony outside the jury's presence. However, Walla ultimately decided not to testify.The Sixth Judicial District Court, Sweet Grass County, presided over the trial. Walla's counsel agreed to strike the provision regarding the offer of proof after Walla decided not to testify. Walla also proposed a supplemental verdict form to ensure the jury's unanimous decision on his self-defense claim, which the court rejected, stating that the standard verdict form and jury instructions were sufficient. The jury found Walla guilty of Deliberate Homicide, and he was sentenced to 100 years in prison, with an additional 10-year Weapons Enhancement.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed the case. The court held that the District Court did not improperly reject the procedural agreement's provision, as Walla's decision not to testify rendered the issue moot. Additionally, the court found no abuse of discretion in rejecting the supplemental verdict form, as the jury instructions clearly required a unanimous verdict and adequately informed the jury of the State's burden to prove Walla's actions were not justified. The Supreme Court affirmed the District Court's judgment and sentence. View "State v. Walla" on Justia Law

Bill B. Bokma, the petitioner, was arrested in December 2020 for felony driving under the influence of alcohol. He was released on the condition that he abstain from alcohol, which he failed to do, leading to another arrest. Bokma entered into a plea agreement with the State, which included alternative sentences contingent upon his acceptance into the Eighth Judicial District Adult Drug Treatment Court Program (ADTC). He pleaded guilty and was accepted into ADTC. However, Bokma violated the treatment court’s conditions, leading to a report of violation and a request for his termination from ADTC.The District Court initially dismissed the State’s petition to terminate Bokma from ADTC after he began engaging in the treatment program. However, due to repeated violations, the State again sought to terminate his participation in November 2022. Bokma stipulated that he was unable to complete ADTC, and the District Court revoked his suspended sentence, committing him to the Department of Corrections (DOC) for a three-year term with credit for twenty-seven days of jail time and eight days of elapsed time.The Supreme Court of the State of Montana reviewed Bokma’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, requesting additional credit for jail time and elapsed time. The court determined that Bokma was entitled to an additional twenty-two days of jail time credit, bringing the total to forty-nine days. The court also addressed the issue of whether the Montana Incentives and Interventions Grid (MIIG) should have been applied to Bokma’s revocation. The court concluded that although the District Court erred in classifying Bokma’s failure to complete ADTC as a non-compliance violation, the revocation was proper due to his repeated violations and failure to complete the treatment program.The Supreme Court granted Bokma’s petition in part, remanding the case to the District Court to amend its order to include the additional jail time credit. The court denied Bokma’s other claims and closed the matter. View "Bokma v. Olsen" on Justia Law