Case Title: STATE v MANN

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: montana

Court: Montana Supreme Court

Date: 1976-02-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
No. 13244 I N T H E S U P R E M E C O U R T O F THE STATE O F M O N T A N A 1976 T H E STATE O F M O N T A N A , P l a i n t i f f and Respondent, -vs - FRANKLIN MANN , Defendant and Appellant. Origina 1 Proceeding : Counsel of Record: For Appellant: J. Vau@n:Barron argued, Great F a l l s , Montana For Respondent : Hon. Robert L. Woodahl, Attorney General, Helena, Montana John F. North argued, Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana 3 . Fred Bourdeau, County Attorney, Great F a l l s , Montana Carroll C. Blend, Deputy County Attorney, appeared, Great F a l l s , Montana Submitted: February 14, 1976 ; ! i 2 , i n $ tgtE ~ e c i d e d : M r . J u s t i c e John Conway Harrison delivered t h e Opinion of the Court. Petitioner f i l e d a p e t i t i o n i n t h i s Court, pursuant t o section 95-2601, et.seq., R.C.M. 1947, t o s e t aside the sentence imposed upon him by the d i s t r i c t court, Cascade County. A n adversary hearing was granted. O n December 13, 1974, the Cascade County attorney f i l e d an Information against p e t i t i o n e r , charging him with the crime of aggravated assault under section 94-5-202 (1) ( a ) , R.C.M. 1947. The a s s a u l t was committed upon the person of one Dawn M. Schaeffer, a f o s t e r child two years old, placed with p e t i t i o n e r and h i s wife. Following a r r e s t , p e t i t i o n e r was released on bond and t r i a l was s e t f o r April 28, 1975. O n t h a t date, p e t i t i o n e r withdrew h i s plea of not g u i l t y and entered a plea of g u i l t y . Sentencing was s e t f o r May 29, 1975. After a presentence investigation, p e t i t i o n e r was sentenced t o 15 years i n the s t a t e prison. During the period from the time of h i s a r r e s t i n December 1974, t o h i s sentencing i n May 1975, p e t i t i o n e r underwent evalua- t i o n and treatment from D r . Edward E. Shubat, a c l i n i c a l psycholo- g i s t i n Great F a l l s , Montana. D r . huba at's report was submitted t o the t r i a l court and he t e s t i f i e d a t t h e sentence hearing. The report shows petitioner was a 22 year old married man with an I.Q. of 123, which placed him roughly i n the top s i x percent of the popula- tion. H i s record reveals no juvenile record nor any a r r e s t s . H e has an honorable discharge from t h e United States A i r Force. The child Dawn was placed i n p e t i t i o n e r ' s home on July 17, 1974, a s a f o s t e r home f o r the c h i l d , with the plan t h a t she could be adopted by the couple i f it worked out. A t the time of the sentence hearing, D r . Shubat t e s t i f i e d p e t i t i o n e r was s u f f e r i n g b an obsessive-compulsive neurosis a t the time of the assault. However, he s t a t e d t h a t a f t e r treatment peti- tioner worked toward learning how t o deal with h i s neurosis and had moved ro t h a t uoint where he w o u l d require no more than s i x months of treatment t o be completely recovered. He f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t , i n h i s opinion, prison would be detrimental t o p e t i t i o n e r and he was not a danger t o anyone. The t r i a l judge noted, a f t e r hearing t h e testimony i n miriga t i o n : I I I wish someone could come i n here and t e l l t h e Court t h i s l i t t l e g i r l he beat up would have a s good a t r e a t - ment a s he has got. A l l the r e s t of her l i f e she i s not going t o recover. She i s a baby, and u n t i l t h e day she d i e s she w i l l probably be a vegetable through t h e a c t s of t h i s gentleman. I have never seen such a t e r r i b l e rreatment of a c h i l d a s t h a t man gave her, and I c a n ' t overlook t h a t . The man should be punished f o r t h e a c t t h a t he did. Here i s a baby g i r l , a l l the rest of her Life w i l l be nothing. 1 1 4 f t e r entering t h e s t a t e prison, p e t i t i o n e r applied t o the Sentence Review Division of t h e Supreme Court of Montana, f o r a review of h i s sentence. Hearing w a s held on July 25, 1975. Counsel f o r p e t i t i o n e r undertook t o i n v e s t i g a t e the f a c t s r e l i e d upon by t h e court i n passing sentence and submitted t o t h e Sentence Review Board: 1. A l e t t e r from D r . Jack L. Haling, of t h e P e d i a t r i c s Department of the Great F a l l s Clinic who had examined and t e s t e d the c h i l d . D r . Haling reported t h a t t h e f a c t s r e l i e d upon by t h e court "* 9~ 9; i s absolutely f a l s e . r I 2. Accompanying D r . ~ a l i n g ' s l e t t e r wasa r e p o r t by Nancy Shubat, Ph.D., a c l i n i c a l psychologist, which confirms t h e findings of D r . Haling. After hearing, t h e Sentence Review Board denied t h e r e l i e f requested and appeal was taken t o t h i s Court. P e t i t i o n e r a l l e g e s t h e t r i a l c o u r t , i n ~ l , ) t i n g s o l e l y upon an unsubstantiated f a c t appearing nowhere i n t h e record, denied him h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l due process r i g h t under t h e United S t a t e s Consti- t u t i o n and t h e Montana Constitution t o n o t i c e and an opportunity t o challgge t h e t r u t h of a f a c t r e l i e d upon by t h e court i n s t r i p p i n g him of h i s l i b e r t y f o r 15 years of h i s l i f e . The issue is whether or nut the t r i a l court had s u f f i c i e n t f a c t u a l evidence before i t t o j u s t i f y t h e sentence. P e t i t i o n e r r e l i e s upon Townsend v. Burke, 334 U.S. 736, 740, 68 S . C t . 1252, 92 L Ed 1690, 1693; United S t a t e s v. ldeston, 448 F.2d 626; and United S t a t e s v. Espinoza, 481 F.2d 553. These cases stand f o r t h e p r i n c i p l e s t a t e d i n Townsend, which p e t i t i o n e r a l l e g e s i s applicable here: "* * Jc we concltrte * JX J; t h i s prisoner was sentenced on the b a s i s of assumptions concerning h i s criminal record which were materially untrue. Such a r e s u l t , whether caused by carelessness o r design, i s incon- s i s t e n t with due process of law, and such a convic- t i o n cannot stand. l I W e find t h e cases r e l i e d upon by p e t i t i o n e r a r e f a c t u a l l y not i n puinc t o t h e i n s t a n t case and t h e r e f o r e a r e not applicable. Here, t h e t r i a l court had f a r more than a statement which appeared i n t h e presentence r e p o r t by M r s . B e t t i s , a supervisor of t h e Cascade County Welfare Department, t h a t t h e c h i l d had sustained permanent damage from t h e beating. I n addition t o t h e a f f i d a v i t f o r leave t o f i l e t h e Information d i r e c t , which contained two pages of what happened, and upon which the court authorized t h e f i l i n g of t h e Information, the court signed orders and had before it t h e r e p o r t s of D r s . J. A . C u r t i s , J. L. Haling, J. R. Halseth, Fred M. Long, Samuel Dachs, and George W. Schemm, t h e i r records, s t u d i e s , examination, laboratory r e s u l t s , x-rays, and analyses prepared i n t h e i r examina- t i o n and treatment of t h e c h i l d Dawn. Photographs of Dawn were taken on December 7, 1974, while she was a t t h e Deaconess Hospital. The t r i a l court authorized and issued a search warrant on December 10, 1974, f o r a "belt with buckle, h a i r , body t i s s u e , blood and o t h e r evidence r e l a t i n g t o a suspected a s s a u l t on Dawn Schaeffer on o r about December 5 , 1974." The b e l t was picked up by Officer Jack L. Macek, and was p a r t of t h e evidence before t h e court a t t h e time of t h e sentencing. I n addition, t h e c o u r t had before it a f u l l investigatory r e p o r t of Officer Macek, who went t o the h o s p i t a l with a deputy county a t t o r n e y and who interviewed the various doctors and nurses i n attendance. This r e p o r t indicated t h a t a t 10:OO p.m. on December 7, 1974, t h e c h i l d was i n a c r i t i c a l condition. The r e p o r t notes: " W e found t h a t she was i n a coma, t h a t t h e b r u i s e s extended from her head t o her toes. Her head w a s bandaged. H e r arms and legs were a l l bruised. The inner portion of her legs and vagina were purple. The s i d e of her face was bruised,' and one eye blackened. Her back had b r u i s e s on it, along with portions of her stomach. Her r i g h t s i d e appeared t o be paralyzed." The r e p o r t indicated the attending doctors were c e r t a i n t h e c h i l d had been assaulted and t h e i n j u r i e s were not from any accident. D r . Curtis indicated t h a t he f e l t t h e b r u i s e s extended over a period of t i m e . A letter i n t h e f i l e from t h e Cascade County Welfare Department dated May 16, 1975, reported t h a t Dawn had been released from t h e h o s p i t a l on February 4, 1975. Among other things, t h e l e t t e r s t a t e s t h a t a t t h e time she was released "9: %he was unable t o s i t alone and had i u s t begun t o feed h e r s e l f . Her speech p a t t e r n s were limited and she spoke i n a parroting manner, smiling very l i t t l e . A s her i n j u r i e s had caused neuromuscular damage, her movements on her r i g h t s i d e appeared s p a s t i c and she had l i t t l e c o n t r o l over t h a t s i d e of her body." This Court has c o n s i s t e n t l y held t h a t i f a sentence i s within t h e s t a t u t o r y l i m i t s provided by the s t a t u t e , it i s n o t an abuse of t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s d i s c r e t i o n . S t a t e v. Gussenhoven, 116 Mont. 350, 152 P.2d 876; P e t i t i o n of Amor, 143 Mont. 305, 389 P.2d 54. Here, a review o f , t h e court f i l e leads t h i s Court t o t h e conclusion t h a t t h e t r i a l court had s u f f i c i e n t f a c t s before it. W e f i n d no abuse of discrection. Finding no grounds t o set a s i d e t h e sentence, we a f f i r m t h e d i s t r i c t court. We Concur: