2002 MT 13
STATE OF MONTANA, v. Brister,
1. Did Brister waive his objections by failing to contemporaneously object when the
sentence was pronounced and did he file a timely appeal from the District Court's
sentence?
2. Did the District Court's sentence violate Brister's constitutional protections
against double jeopardy?
3. Did the District Court err in imposing new conditions upon a continuation of
Brister's suspended sentence?
Therefore, we conclude the proper remedy here is to remand this matter to the District Court for a new disposition hearing in which to determine whether to strike all the new conditions added by the Court and continue Brister's suspended sentence under the original conditions, or revoke suspension and order Brister committed to the Montana Department of Corrections for the remainder of his sentence, as permitted under § 46-18-203, MCA (1983
Showing posts with label double jeopardy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label double jeopardy. Show all posts
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Double jeopardy Montana habeas corpus law
No. 05-617 2006 MT 240 JASON LEE LOTT v. STATE OF MONTA
In light of the writ’s history and purpose, as well as Montana’s constitutional guarantee in Article II, Section 19, that the writ of habeas corpus shall never be suspended, we conclude that, as applied to a facially invalid sentence—a sentence which, as a matter of law, the court had no authority to impose—the procedural bar created by § 46-22-101(2), MCA, unconstitutionally suspends the writ. We hold that incarceration of an individual pursuant to a facially invalid sentence represents a "grievous wrong," Brecht, 507 U.S. at 637,113 S. Ct. at 1721, and a "miscarriage of justice," Perry, 232 Mont. at 462, 758 P.2d at 273, warranting habeas corpus relief.
In light of the writ’s history and purpose, as well as Montana’s constitutional guarantee in Article II, Section 19, that the writ of habeas corpus shall never be suspended, we conclude that, as applied to a facially invalid sentence—a sentence which, as a matter of law, the court had no authority to impose—the procedural bar created by § 46-22-101(2), MCA, unconstitutionally suspends the writ. We hold that incarceration of an individual pursuant to a facially invalid sentence represents a "grievous wrong," Brecht, 507 U.S. at 637,113 S. Ct. at 1721, and a "miscarriage of justice," Perry, 232 Mont. at 462, 758 P.2d at 273, warranting habeas corpus relief.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
About Me
.jpg)
- MarkAnthonyGiven
- Given was raised on the streets and in foster homes surrounded by twelve girls. By age 11, authorities already warned his foster mother: “He’s too smart for his britches — keep an eye on him.” That early spark of genius — later estimated in the 145–155+ IQ range (top 0.1% to 0.01% of humanity) — combined with an elite, poetic vocabulary that flows like open chords, propelled him into a life few could survive, let alone immortalize. From the age of 16, Given became a one-man crime wave: robbing 75 banks with nothing but a Bic Pen and a smile, inventing the Mercury Bandit invisibility trick with a baby thermometer, dropping through pharmacy roofs with a Superman pillowcase, and running from New Orleans detectives through the French Quarter while dressed as a 70-year-old woman. He served 12 years on a 10-year federal sentence, reading 120 volumes of Supreme Court decisions in the hole and ruling the law library like a throne. He met the devil twice on a dope-sick bed and refused to curse God — only to have angels physically grab his arm and pull him back. His 56+ stories pour out raw, unoutlined, and alive — no MFA polish, no ghostwriter, no filter. The prose is Hemingway-tight yet