2002 MT 246
STATE OF MONTANA,v.
JOHN M. MEEKS,
1. Upon declaring Meeks unfit to proceed, did the District Court fail to comply with the provisions of § 46-14-221(2)(c), MCA (1999)?
2. Did Meeks receive an improper sentence?
Therefore, upon review of the evaluation, there was no basis upon which to continue criminal proceedings against Meeks in November of 1999. Under § 46-14-221(2)(c), MCA (1999), the District Court was required to dismiss the criminal charges against Meeks, and the prosecution was required to commence civil commitment procedures, as provided in §§ 53-21-101-704, MCA (1999). Accordingly, we hold that, pursuant to § 46-14-221(2)(c), MCA (1999), the District Court erred in not dismissing the criminal charges against Meeks in November of 1999.
ISSUE 2 Did Meeks receive an improper sentence?
In the alternative, Meeks contends that his sentence is illegal, as he was committed to the custody of the DOC, rather than the Department of Public Health and Human Services. The State maintains the District Court correctly concluded that Meeks belonged in a correctional facility. However, our above holding renders Meeks' sentence moot. As such, we decline to reach this issue.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court is reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this Opinion.
Paralegal Mark Anthony Given has spent four years hand collecting every winning criminal case in the history of the Montana Supreme Court. A Montana Criminal Defense Attorney can find here in 15 minutes what would take days or even weeks to locate. This is a sample of the over 1,000 available winning cases, the rest will be available soon via pay site.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(103)
-
▼
May
(47)
- Unable to pay fines
- Sentencing restriction nor "reasonably related" to...
- Bailey error, no restitution to dismissed counts
- Santobello error - breached plea agreement, specif...
- Blogroll Me!
- Ineffective Appellate Counsel
- Probable cause hearing, retroactive applcation of ...
- Santobello error, specific performance
- No restitution for dismissed count
- Insufficient evidence
- New Trial, Strike the jury
- we hold that the District Court exceeded its statu...
- we reverse that part of the sentence requiring tha...
- Ineffective Assistance of counsel winner
- insufficient evidence to support a conviction for
- No contempt for failing to pay fines
- did not receive a probable cause hearing within 36...
- Speedy Trial remand
- Ilegal sentence enhancement
- defective jury selection
- Post conviction appointment of counsel
- Parole eligibility
- Dangerous weapon enhancement double jeopardy
- Prosecutor's misconduct
- Ineffective counsel winner
- Ineffective assistance of counsel,
- Restitution winner
- Breached Plea Agreement
- Victim released unharmed
- Fines
- Illegal sentence
- Impartial juror
- No criminal charges for criminally insane
- Postponed restitution imposition improper
- Prior conviction enhancement infirm
- Boykin violation
- sex offender redesignation
- ex post facto winner
- Jail time credit, illegal sentence
- illegal sentence
- Ineffective assistance of counsel hearing
- street time credit, suspended sentence revoked
- Postconviction ineffectiveassistance of counsel hu...
- Motion to suppress, no exigent cirmcumstances
- Parole hearing, right to counsel
- Prior conviction unconstitutionally obtained
- Post conviction winner parole hearing
-
▼
May
(47)
No comments:
Post a Comment