Case Title: STATE EX REL MAIER v CITY COURT

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: montana

Court: Montana Supreme Court

Date: 1982-08-20T00:00:00Z

Document:
No. 82-168 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF M O ! J T A N A STATE OF MONTANA, ex rel., LLOYD SCOTT MAIER, a Minor, and ROBERT P. MORIN, his attorney, Petitioners, THE CITY COURT OF THE CITY OF BILLINGS, COUNTY OF YELLOWSTONE, HONORABLE DONALD E. BJERTNESS, A JUDGE THEREOF, Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING: Counsel of Record: For Petitioners: Berger Law Firm, Billings, Montana Robert Morin, Billings, Pontana For Respondents: Donald E. Bjertness, Billings, Montana Peterson, Schofield and Leckie, Billings, Montana Submitted: July 16, 1982 Decided: August 20, 1982 Filed: & u G 2 0 1982 M r . J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t . T h i s is a p e t i t i o n by t h e minor, Lloyd S c o t t Maier, and h i s c o u n s e l , Robert P. Morin, f o r a w r i t of s u p e r v i s o r y c o n t r o l o r o t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e w r i t . W e g r a n t t h e p e t i t i o n and deny. On February 4 , 1982, t h e p e t i t i o n e r , Lloyd S c o t t Maier, was i s s u e d a n o t i c e to a p p e a r on a c o m p l a i n t of f a i l u r e to d r i v e i n a c a r e f u l and p r u d e n t manner. The c o m p l a i n t was i s s u e d by o f f i c e r Dewayne Ness, a p o l i c e o f f i c e r employed by t h e C i t y of B i l l i n g s . He was n o t r e q u i r e d to a p p e a r u n t i l February 11, 1982. The p e t i t i o n e r , Maier, appeared on t h e e l e v e n t h day b e f o r e t h e C i t y C o u r t of t h e C i t y of B i l l i n g s , County of Yellowstone, b e f o r e r e s p o n d e n t J u d g e , Donald E . B j e r t n e s s . A t t h e t i m e of h i s a p p e a r a n c e , he was asked i f he had a p a r e n t w i t h him. H e r e p l i e d t h a t he d i d n o t and Judge B j e r t n e s s d i r e c t e d him t o l e a v e t h e courtroom, g o to a phone provided f o r him and c a l l h i s p a r e n t s to have them a p p e a r w i t h him. A f t e r some t i m e he reappeared i n t h e courtroom, and i n d i c a t e d to Judge B j e r t n e s s t h a t h i s p a r e n t s would n o t a p p e a r w i t h him and he would have t o appear by h i m s e l f . A f t e r b e i n g t o l d t h a t t h e p a r e n t s would n o t a p p e a r w i t h him, Judge B j e r t n e s s accepted t h e p e t i t i o n e r ' s p l e a of g u i l t y and f i n e d him i n t h e amount of $45. The motor v e h i c l e he w a s d r i v i n g was impounded a f t e r p e t i t i o n e r t o l d t h e c o u r t t h a t he d i d n o t have t h e $45. In a d d i t i o n to impounding t h e car he w a s d r i v i n g , t h e p e t i t i o n e r , Maier, was r e q u i r e d to t u r n i n h i s Montana d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e to t h e c o u r t . P e t i t i o n e r h i r e d c o u n s e l i n February 1982, s i x d a y s a f t e r having e n t e r e d t h e p l e a and through c o u n s e l f i l e d a motion to withdraw h i s p l e a of g u i l t y w i t h a memorandum i n s u p p o r t to t h e c i t y c o u r t . A t b o t h a p p e a r a n c e s , t h e p e t i t i o n e r , Maier, was age s e v e n t e e n , b o r n on J u l y 25, 1964. Two months later t h e p e t i t i o n e r appeared w i t h c o u n s e l , Morin, r e q u e s t i n g a withdrawal of t h e p r e v i o u s p l e a of g u i l t y . A f t e r e v i d e n c e was h e a r d , Judge B j e r t n e s s e n t e r e d a w r i t t e n o r d e r denying t h e p e t i t i o n e r ' s motion to withdrew t h e p l e a of g u i l t y . The c o u r t i s s u e d t h e o r d e r on May 1 3 I 19 82. A t t h e t i m e of h i s appearance on A p r i l 1 2 , 1982, p e t i t i o n e r contended t h a t as a seventeen-year-old youth, he was unable to i n t e l l i g e n t l y and u n d e r s t a n d i n g l y e n t e r a p l e a of g u i l t y . H e a r g u e d t h a t , a s a minor, as a matter of l a w , he was incompetent t o a p p e a r w i t h o u t p a r e n t and/or an a t t o r n e y i n e n t e r i n g h i s p l e a o f g u i l t y . The r e s p o n d e n t judge, i n h i s May 1 3 w r i t t e n o r d e r denying t h e w i t h d r a w a l of t h e p l e a , s t a t e d t h a t a j u v e n i l e a p p e a r i n g i n t h e c i t y c o u r t on a t r a f f i c c i t a t i o n does n o t have t h e r i g h t to a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l and found it was unnecessary to have appointed c o u n s e l p r e s e n t when one c o n s i d e r s t h e r e was no p r o v i s i o n f o r i n c a r c e r a t i o n of a j u v e n i l e upon h i s e n t r y of a p l e a of g u i l t y o r a c o n v i c t i o n r e l a t i v e to a minor t r a f f i c v i o l a t i o n . The sole i s s u e p r e s e n t e d t o t h i s Court by t h e p e t i t i o n e r ' s r e q u e s t is whether a minor is incompetent to a p p e a r i n a c i t y c o u r t on t h e charge of f a i l i n g to d r i v e i n a c a r e f u l and p r u d e n t manner w i t h o u t a p a r e n t , g u a r d i a n o r a t t o r n e y and waive h i s r i g h t i n o r d e r t o e n t e r i n t o a v a l i d p l e a of g u i l t y . The p e t i - t i o n e r a r g u e s Judge B j e r t n e s s f a i l e d to f o l l o w t h e clear mandates o f s e c t i o n 41-5-511, MCA, s e c t i o n 61-12-601, MCA, and o u r r e c e n t case of Edward v. C o l l i n g s ( 1 9 8 1 ) , Mont . - - 1 632 P.2d 325, 38 St.Rep. 1240. I n Edward, s u p r a , t h i s Court c o n s i d e r e d a w r i t of habeas c o r p u s on b e h a l f of a minor who had e n t e r e d a p l e a of g u i l t y of i l l e g a l p o s s e s s i o n of a l c o h o l , where t h e c o u r t s e n t e n c e d t h e minor to a f i n e of $50 and t e n days i n t h e Powell County j a i l to be s e r v e d on weekends. A s h e r e , t h e youth w a s unaccompanied by a p a r e n t o r counsel a t t h e t i m e of t h e p l e a and p e t i t i o n e r a l l e g e d t h a t he r e q u e s t e d t h e r i g h t to speak to h i s f a t h e r b e f o r e e n t e r i n g a p l e a , b u t t h a t such r e q u e s t was denied a f t e r he a d m i t t e d t h e p o s s e s s i o n of two cans of b e e r . T h i s Court h e l d t h a t t h e Montana Youth Court A c t , Chapter 5 , s e c t i o n s 41-5-101 t h r o u g h 41-5-924 a p p l i e d . However, t h e r e is an i m p o r t a n t d i s t i n c t i o n be tween Edward s u p r a , and t h e p r e s e n t case. The v i o l a t i o n i n Edward w a s an i l l e g a l p o s s e s s i o n of a l c o h o l , where an i n c a r c e r a t i o n s e n t e n c e w a s imposed. I n t h i s case t h e charge was o n l y t h a t of a t r a f f i c v i o l a t i o n w i t h o u t an i m p o s i t i o n of any i n c a r c e r a t i o n . Here, t h e r e was no p o s s i b i l i t y of any j a i l t i m e being g i v e n as p a r t of t h e s e n t e n c e a c c o r d i n g to o u r l a w . W e f i n d t h a t n e i t h e r t h e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s of t h e Montana Youth Court A c t a p p l y nor is t h e Edward case d e t e r m i n a t i v e of t h e i s s u e p r e s e n t e d to us. Under t h e p r o v i s i o n of 61-12-601, MCA, t h e c i t y c o u r t had j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e matter, and t h e p e n a l t i e s p r e s c r i b e d and o r d e r e d by t h e c o u r t were w i t h i n t h e s t a t u t o r y a u t h o r i t y g r a n t e d . "Unlawful o p e r a t i o n by minor --- j u r i s d i c t i o n o f c o u r t s --- p e n a l t i e s . " ( 1 ) The d i s t r i c t c o u r t s and t h e j u s t i c e s ' c o u r t s of t h e state and t h e municipal and c i t y c o u r t s of cities and towns s h a l l have con- c u r r e n t o r i g i n a l j u r s i d i c t i o n i n a l l pro- c e e d i n g s concerning t h e u n l a w f u l o p e r a t i o n o f motor v e h i c l e s by c h i l d r e n under t h e age of 1 8 y e a r s . " ( 2 ) Whenever, a f t e r a h e a r i n g b e f o r e t h e c o u r t , it s h a l l be found t h a t a c h i l d under t h e age of 18 y e a r s h a s u n l a w f u l l y o p e r a t e d a motor v e h i c l e , t h e c o u r t may: " ( a ) impose a f i n e , n o t exceeding $50, pro- v i d e d such c h i l d s h a l l n o t be imprisoned f o r f a i l u r e to pay such f i n e ; " ( b ) revoke t h e d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e of such c h i l d , or suspend t h e same f o r such t i m e as may be f i x e d by t h e c o u r t ; and " ( c ) o r d e r any motor v e h i c l e owned o r o p e r a t e d by such c h i l d to be impounded by t h e p r o b a t i o n o f f i c e r f o r such t i m e , n o t exceeding 60 d a y s , as s h a l l be f i x e d by t h e c o u r t . However, i f t h e c o u r t s h a l l f i n d t h a t t h e o p e r a t i o n of such motor v e h i c l e w a s w i t h o u t t h e c o n s e n t of t h e owner, t h e n such v e h i c l e s h a l l n o t be impounded. " ( 3 ) Upon nonpayment of any f i n e h e r e i n pro- v i d e d f o r , t h e c o u r t may o r d e r t h a t any motor v e h i c l e owned b y s a i d c h i l d o r o p e r a t e d by s a i d c h i l d w i t h t h e c o n s e n t of t h e owner s h a l l b e impounded u n t i l t h e f i n e s h a l l be p a i d , or may o r d e r t h a t t h e d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e of such c h i l d s h a l l be t a k e n up and h e l d by t h e proba- t i o n o f f i c e r u n t i l payment of s a i d f i n e , or may c a u s e both s a i d motor v e h i c l e and s a i d d r i v e r ' s l i c e n s e to be t a k e n up and impounded u n t i l such f i n e s h a l l be p a i d ; b u t no c h i l d s h a l l be committed to o r h e l d i n any d e t e n t i o n f a c i l i t y or j a i l by r e a s o n of non-payment of s u c h f i n e ." S e c t i o n 61-12-601, MCA. I n a d d i t i o n , we n o t e t h a t t h e Montana Youth Court A c t does n o t a p p l y to t r a f f i c v i o l a t i o n s . S e c t i o n 41-5-511, MCA, p r o v i d e s as f o l l o w s : " R i g h t - t o Counsel. I n a l l p r o c e e d i n g s f o l l o w i n g t h e f i l i n g of a p e t i t i o n a l l e g i n g a d e l i n q u e n t y o u t h o r y o u t h i n need of s u p e r v i s i o n , t h e youth and t h e p a r e n t or guar- d i a n of youth s h a l l be a d v i s e d by t h e c o u r t , o r i n absence of t h e c o u r t , by its r e p r e s e n t a t i v e , t h a t t h e youth may be r e p r e - s e n t e d by c o u n s e l a t a l l s t a g e s of t h e p r o c e e d i n g s . I f c o u n s e l is n o t r e t a i n e d , or it a p p e a r s t h a t counsel w i l l n o t be r e t a i n e d , c o u n s e l s h a l l be appointed f o r t h e y o u t h i f t h e p a r e n t s and t h e youth are unable to pro- v i d e c o u n s e l , u n l e s s t h e r i g h t to a p p o i n t c o u n s e l was waived by t h e youth and p a r e n t or g u a r d i a n . . ." T h i s s t a t u t e h a s no a p p l i c a t i o n to t h e case a t hand for h e r e t h e p e t i t i o n e r was i n t h e C i t y Court of B i l l i n g s on a t r a f f i c v i o l a t i o n , n o t as a r e s u l t of a f i l i n g of a p e t i t i o n a l l e g i n g him t o be a d e l i n q u e n t youth or a youth i n need of s u p e r v i s i o n . Our s t a t u t e s p r o v i d e i n t h e above-quoted s t a t u t e , 61-12-601, MCA, f o r t h e h a n d l i n g of v i o l a t i o n s by a minor and t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n s of t h e c o u r t to handle such v i o l a t i o n . I n a d d i t i o n it should be f u r t h e r noted t h a t t h e Youth Court A c t 41-5-203 p r o v i d e s : " J u r i s d i c t i o n -- o f t h e C o u r t . (1) Except as provided i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 2 ) , t h e c o u r t h a s - e x c l u s i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n of a l l p r o c e e d i n g s under t h e Montana Youth Court A c t i n which a y o u t h is a l l e g e d t o be a d e l i n q u e n t youth, a y o u t h i n need of s u p e r v i s i o n , or a youth i n need of care or concerning any i n d i v i d u a l under twenty-one y e a r s of age charged w i t h having v i o l a t e d any l a w of t h e s t a t e or o r d i - nance of any c i t y or town o t h e r -- t h a n a t r a f f i c or f i s h and game v i o l a t i o n p r i o r t o having - - - - - become e i g h t e e n y e a r s - o f - age." (Emphasis s u p p l i e d . ) Having found t h a t n e i t h e r t h e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s of t h e Montana Youth Court A c t a p p l y n o r is Edward, s u p r a , d e t e r - m i n a t i v e of t h e i s s u e a t hand, we w i l l c o n s i d e r now t h e f a c t s of t h e case p r e s e n t e d to u s to see i f it meets t h e i n t e n t of our l a w . T h i s p r e s e n t s us with t h e i s s u e of whether t h e p e t i t i o n e r , Maier, made a knowledgeable waiver of h i s r i g h t s p r i o r to t h e time which he e n t e r e d h i s p l e a of g u i l t y . On t h e i n f o r m a t i o n submitted to u s f o r o u r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h i s p e t i t i o n it a p p e a r s t h a t t h e p e t i t i o n e r , Lloyd S c o t t Maier, d i d , i n f a c t , make a knowledgeable waiver of h i s r i g h t s p r i o r to t h e t i m e he e n t e r e d t h e p l e a . There is nothing to base a n y o t h e r c o n t e n t i o n , as made by t h e comment t h a t he d i d n o t u n d e r s t a n d and know what t h e l a w was i n regard to t h e r e q u i r e - ments to d r i v e a v e h i c l e i n a c a r e f u l and p r u d e n t manner. A s a seventeen-year-old, who had been g r a n t e d a l i c e n s e to d r i v e an a u t o m o b i l e , it would a p p e a r from h i s r e c o r d t h a t he had t h e capa- b i l i t y to d e t e r m i n e i n h i s own mind i f he had, i n f a c t , f a i l e d to comply w i t h t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e laws of t h e S t a t e of Montana. Here p e t i t i o n e r was g i v e n an o p p o r t u n i t y by t h e p r e s i d i n g judge and, i n f a c t , d i r e c t e d to c a l l h i s p a r e n t s to have them a p p e a r w i t h him a t t h e t i m e he made h i s appearance. A s pre- v i o u s l y n o t e d , h i s n o t i c e t o a p p e a r was i s s u e d on February 4 , 1982, a week b e f o r e he was r e q u i r e d to a p p e a r as he d i d on F e b r u a r y 11, 1982. T h i s gave him s u f f i c i e n t o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e l a y t h a t n o t i c e of t i m e f o r h i s appearance to a p a r e n t o r g u a r d i a n . H e could have a t t h e t i m e of h i s appearance had h i s p a r e n t s w i t h him, or as p r e v i o u s l y noted on t h e b a s i s of h i s t e l e p h o n e c a l l to g e t h i s p a r e n t s t h e y could have been w i t h him a t t h e t i m e he made h i s p l e a , and it was o n l y af ter making t h e c a l l and informing t h e p r e s i d i n g judge t h a t h i s p a r e n t s would n o t a p p e a r t h a t he was allowed t o e n t e r h i s p l e a of g u i l t y . W e r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e r i g h t to c o u n s e l is one of t h e funda- m e n t a l r i g h t s t h a t s u p p o r t j u s t i c e i n o u r system and t h a t it is a r i g h t e s s e n t i a l to minors who are n o t knowledgeable of t h e i r fundamental r i g h t s . However, i n t h e case a t hand, it does not a p p e a r to be t h a t w e have one of t h o s e cases i n which t h e p e t i t i o n e r , a minor, could claim he did not know what he was doing; t h a t he did not know the consequences of h i s a c t ; and t h a t he was not given an opportunity t o have h i s p a r e n t s , guardians, o r a chosen counsel t o r e p r e s e n t him. I n view of t h e foregoing, we hold t h a t the p r e s i d i n g Judge, B j e r t n e s s , d i d not abuse h i s d i s c r e t i o n i n denying p e t i t i o n e r ' s r i g h t t o withdraw h i s p l e a of g u i l t y and e n t e r a p l e a of not g u i l t y . W e concur: Chief J u s t i c e , ' J u s t i c e s