Title: STATE v BRETZ CLINE

State: montana

Issuer: Montana Supreme Court

Document:

No. 13297 I N T H E SUPREME C O U R T O F THE STATE O F M O N T A N A 19 7 6 T H E STATE O F M O N T A N A , p l a i n t i f f and Appellant, -vs - L. R. BRETZ and MERREL J. CLINE, Defendants and Respondents. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Third J u d i c i a l District, Honorable Robert Boyd, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant : Hon. Robert L. Woodahl, Attorney General, Helena, Montana Albert W. Meloling argued, Special Assistant Attorney Genera 1, Helena, Montana James J. Masar, County Attorney, Deer Lodge, Montana For Respondent : Morrison and Hedman, Whitefish, Montana Frank Morrison argued, Whitefish, Montana D. R. Matthews argued, Missoula, Montana Submitted: A p r i l 7, 1976 Decided : APP 2 T: 1976 4FR 2 r:: 1998 F i l e d : M r . J u s t i c e Wesley C a s t l e s delivered t h e Opinion of t h e Court. This i s an appeal by t h e s t a t e of Montana from a n order of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Powell County, dated February 13, 1976, wherein t h e Honorable Robert J. Boyd granted a defense motion t o t r a n s f e r t o Missoula County, counts V I through X i n c l u s i v e of t h e amended information f i l e d i n Powell County October 23, 1975. O n August 27, 1975, t h e s t a t e of Montana f i l e d a n in- formation and a f f i d a v i t i n support thereof i n Powell County, charging L. R. Bretz and Merrel J. Cline i n a f i v e count i n f o r - mation with t h e f e l o n i e s of conspiracy and s o l i c i t a t i o n as s p e c i f i e d i n s e c t i o n 94-4-102, R.C.M. 1947 and s e c t i o n 94-4-101, R.C.M. 1947, r e s p e c t i v e l y . The a l l e g e d criminal a c t s occurred i n J u l y 1975 i n t h e s t a t e prison where Bretz and C l i n e w e r e serving sentences f o r felony convictions. A s a r e s u l t of t h e information, t h e two p r i s o n e r s w e r e t r a n s f e r r e d , by order of Warden C r i s t , t o t h e Missoula County j a i l . While i n t h e Missoula County j a i l , Bretz and C l i n e w e r e a l l e g e d t o have committed c e r t a i n acts r e s u l t i n g i n t h e f i l i n g of an amended information i n Powell County, adding f i v e new counts, V I through X: conspiracy t o commit p e r j u r y , s o l i c i t a t i o n t o commit perjury, tampering with witnesses, and f a b r i c a t i o n of physical evidence. Each of t h e s e a c t s w a s a l l e g e d t o have been done with d i r e c t regard t o t h e then pending f i v e counts previously f i l e d i n Powell County. Each a l l e g e d criminal a c t , however, w a s designated a s e p a r a t e and new c r i m e occurring i n Missoula County. Counts V I through X , by t h e amended information became s u b j e c t t o defense motions f o r change of venue from Powell t o Missoula County. O n February 13, 1976, Judge Boyd granted t h e motions, ordering venue changed t o Missoula County on Counts V I through X of t h e amended information. Subsequently, Judge Boyd was d i s q u a l i f i e d and Judge Jack Green assumed j u r i s d i c t i o n of t h e o r i g i n a l information case s t i l l pending i n Powell County. The s o l e i s s u e on t h i s appeal is whether t h e proper place f o r venue of counts V I through X of t h e amended informa- t i o n is i n Powell County o r Missoula County. It i s t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e S t a t e i n i t s amended informa- t i o n and supporting a f f i d a v i t t h a t t h e a l l e g e d criminal a c t s i n Missoula County, comprising counts V I through X, c o n s t i t u t e d a c a l c u l a t e d attempt t o d e s t r o y t h e c r e d i b i l i t y of one Jack LaMere, a s t a t e witness expected t o t e s t i f y a s t o t h e a l l e g e d criminal a c t i v i t i e s i n Powell County s p e c i f i e d i n counts I through V. For purposes of b r e v i t y and c l a r i t y , we set f o r t h count No. I X of t h e amended information as i l l u s t r a t i v e of t h e S t a t e ' s p o s i t i o n : "For a f u r t h e r and s e p a r a t e cause of a c t i o n , being a d i f f e r e n t offense of t h e same c l a s s of crimes and o f f e n s e s and connected i n its commission with a l l preceding counts hereof, t h e s a i d defendants, L. R. BRETZ and M E R R E L J. CLINE, then and t h e r e being, then and t h e r e w i l l f u l l y , purposely, knowlingly, wrongfully, and feloniously, on o r about and between t h e d a t e s of August 25, 1975 and October 22, 1975, a t and i n t h e County of Missoula, S t a t e of Montana, d i d commit t h e c r i m e of TAMPERING WITH WITNESSES, a felony, as s p e c i f i e d i n Section 94-7-207, R.C.M. 1947, i n t h a t s a i d defendants L. R. BRETZ and M E R R E L J. CLINE, d i d purposely, knowingly, w i l l f u l l y , wrongfully, unlawfully and f e l o n i o u s l y attempt t o induce and otherwise cause a witness t o t e s t i f y and inform f a l s e l y and withhold testimony and information while believing t h a t o f f i c i a l proceedings and in- v e s t i g a t i o n s w e r e pending i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Third J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t of t h e S t a t e of Montana, i n and f o r t h e County of Powell, e n t i t l e d THE STATE O F MONTANA, P l a i n t i f f , v s . L. R. B R E T Z and M E R R E L J. CLINE, Defendants * * *". (Emphasis supplied. ) Section 95-402, R.C.M. 1947, provides t h a t where an o f f e n s e is committed p a r t l y i n one county and p a r t l y i n another: "Where two ( 2 ) o r more a c t s a r e r e q u i s i t e t o t h e commission of any offense, t h e t r i a l may be i n any county i n which any of such a c t s occur." (Emphasis supplied) . The Revised Commission Comment i n i n t e r p r e t i n g t h i s p a r t i c u - l a r s t a t u t e s a i d : "This p r o v i s i o n allows t h e t r i a l t o t a k e p l a c e i n t h e most convenient county where a n element of t h e o f f e n s e occurred. * * * The o n l y elements of t h e crime which are of i n t e r e s t a r e t h o s e a c t s c o n s t i - t u t i n g o r r e q u i s i t e t o t h e consummation of t h e o f f e n s e ; t h e t r i a l of t h e c a s e may be held i n any county i n which such a c t s occur." The Commission comment cites S t a t e v . C a s s i l l , 70 Mont. 433, 227 P. 49. Considering a g a i n count No. I X , "Tampering w i t h Witnesses" and keeping i n mind t h e s p e c i f i c language of s e c t i o n 95-402 here- i n b e f o r e underlined, " * * * a c t s * * * r e q u i s i t e t o t h e commis- s i o n " of t h e c r i m e charged, w e n o t e t h a t t h i s p a r t i c u l a r count c o r r e c t l y s t a t e s t h e elements of t h e o f f e n s e of tampering w i t h a w i t n e s s , pursuant t o s e c t i o n 94-7-207, R.C.M. 1947, by a l l e g i n g t h e act of tampering i n Missoula County " * * * while b e l i e v i n g t h a t o f f i c i a l proceedings and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s w e r e pending * * * i n and f o r t h e County of Powell, e n t i t l e d T H E STATE O F M O N T A N A , P l a i n t i f f , vs. L. R. BRETZ and MERREL J. CLINE, Defendants * * *". Thus, s i n c e t h e acts r e q u i s i t e t o t h e commission of t h e a l l e g e d o f f e n s e of tampering w i t h a w i t n e s s occurred i n both c o u n t i e s , Powell and Missoula, count No. I X cannot stand independent of t h e Powell County charges under t h e f a c t s a l l e g e d . This s a m e r a t i o n a l e can be a p p l i e d t o counts V I , V I I , V I I I , and X. Respondents urge t h a t S t a t e v. Rother, 130 Mont. 357, 361, 303 P.2d 393 is c o n t r o l l i n g and r e q u i r e s a c o n t r a r y r e s u l t . I n Rother, by a 3 t o 2 m a j o r i t y , t h i s Court held t h a t t h e crime of p e r j u r y by swearing t o a f a l s e a f f i d a v i t i n Lake County before a Notary P u b l i c , was complete i n i t s e l f i n t h a t county even though t h e f a l s e a f f i d a v i t w a s submitted t o t h e S t a t e Board of E q u a l i z a t i o n i n L e w i s and Clark County. The Rother c a s e was narrowly construed under o u r s t a t u t e p r i o r t o s e c t i o n 95-402. The m a j o r i t y opinion i n d i c a t e d however t h a t had t h e crime been more than p e r j u r y , such a s w e might now have by t h e count system provided f o r i n T i t l e 95, adopted e f f e c t i v e January 1, 1968, t h e same t i m e t h e new venue s t a t u t e s w e r e adopted, t h e r e s u l t s would have been d i f f e r e n t . The Court s a i d i n Rother, p. 361: "This is n o t a c a s e where t h e c r i m e i s committed i n more t h a n one county under t h e r e c o r d b e f o r e us. True, had t h e record shown t h a t t h e defend- a n t a f t e r making t h e a f f i d a v i t c a r r i e d it t o Lewis and Clark County and t h e r e placed it before t h e s t a t e board of e q u a l i z a t i o n , t h e n it may be t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n r e s t e d i n e i t h e r Lake o r Lewis & Clark County. But t h e r e i s no evidence h e r e t h a t t h e defendant brought t h e a f f i d a v i t t o Helena i n person. " F i n a l l y , though both Powell and Missoula Counties would have been proper c o u n t i e s f o r venue purposes i n i t i a l l y under our i n t e r p r e - t a t i o n of s e c t i o n 95-402, once t h e information was f i l e d i n Powell County t h a t i s where t h e a c t i o n must s t a y . See S t a t e v. Bretz, 166 Mont. 4 4 4 , 534 P.2d 496, 32 St.Rep. 374. Therefore t h e d i s - t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d i n t r a n s f e r r i n g counts V I through X t o Missoula. The o r d e r of Judge Robert Boyd changing venue t o Missoula County is reversed and set a s i d e and c o u n t s V I through X of t h e amended information are ordered t r a n s f e r r e d back t o Powell County a s a p a r t of t h e amended information f o r t r i a l . J u s t i c e 4 ,' M r . J u s t i c e Frank I. Haswell and M r . ~ u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d i s s e n t i n g : W e would a f f i r m Judge Boyd's o r d e r changing t h e p l a c e of t r i a l of Counts VI through X t o Missoula County. The amended information e x p r e s s l y charges t h a t each of t h e s e crimes was committed " a t and i n t h e County of Missoula, S t a t e of Montana". Defendants' conduct forming t h e b a s i s of each charge is s p e c i f i c a l l y a l l e g e d t o have occurred "while t h e s a i d defendants were p h y s i c a l l y confined i n t h e Missoula County j a i l s i t u a t e d a t Missoula, Montana". Both t h e Montana Consti- t u t i o n and a Montana s t a t u t e r e q u i r e t r i a l t o be held i n t h e county where t h e a l l e g e d c r i m e w a s committed. A r t . 11, Sec. 24, Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n ; s e c t i o n 95-401, R.C.M. 1947. The m a j o r i t y conclude t h a t t h e pendency of c r i m i n a l charges a g a i n s t t h e defendants i n Powell County i s " r e q u i s i t e t o t h e commission" of t h e crimes charged i n Counts V I through X and t h e r e f o r e a l l charges should be t r i e d i n Powell County. W e d i s a g r e e . While it i s arguable t h a t t h e pending charges i n Powell County furnished t h e motive f o r commission of t h e crimes charged i n Counts V I through X I such motive i s no element o r r e q u i s i t e of t h e l a t t e r charges. The a l l e g e d crimes of conspiracy t o commit p e r j u r y , s o l i c i t a t i o n t o commit p e r j u r y , tampering w i t h w i t n e s s e s , and f a b r i c a t i o n of p h y s i c a l evidence w e r e complete i n themselves by t h e a l l e g e d conduct of t h e defendants w i t h o r without a pend- i n g c r i m i n a l proceeding a g a i n s t them i n Powell County. I f t h e l a w w e r e otherwise, a defendant could never be charged w i t h t h e s e crimes a b s e n t pending proceedings a g a i n s t him. For t h e s e reasons, w e d i s s e n t .