NO. 92-604 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Respondent, 

-vsNORIiIAN LEE STEVENS, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, 

In and for the County of Missoula, 

The Honorable Jack L. Green, Judge presiding. 

COUNSEL OF RECORD: 

For Appellant: 

Timothy J. Lape, Attorney at Law, Missoula 

Montana 

For Respondent: 

Hon. Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney General, Barbara 

Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana 

Robert L. Deschamps, 111, Missoula County Attorney, 

Betty Wing, Deputy Missoula County Attorney, 

Missoula, Montana 

Filed: 

Submitted on Briefs: June 1, 1993 

Decided: June 21, 1993 
Justice Karla M. Gray delivered the Opinion of the Court. 

Norman L. Stevens appeals from certain sentencing provisions 

contained in a judgment entered by the Fourth Judicial District 

Court, Missoula County. We reverse and remand. 

The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the District Court 

failed to properly sentence the defendant under applicable 

sentencing statutes. 

Norman L. Stevens was charged in an October 8, 1992 Second 

Amended Information with two counts of felony sexual assault 

alleged to have been committed in July and August, 1991. He pled 

guilty. A presentence investigation report was ordered and 

received and a sentencing hearing was held. Thereafter, the 

District Court sentenced Stevens to a term of twenty years* 

imprisonment in the Montana State Prison on each count, the 

sentences to run concurrently; ten years of each sentence was 

suspended on specific conditions of probation. Judgment was 

entered on the conviction and sentence. Stevens appeals. 

Did the District Court err in failing to properly sentence the 

defendant under applicable sentencing statutes? 

Criminal sentencing alternatives are strictly matters of 

statute in Montana. Certain statutes also impose affirmative 

obligations on a sentencing court. Here, the parties agree that 

the District Court erred in failing to sentence Stevens in 

accordance with applicable statutes, namely 65 46-18-201, 46-18- 

223, and 46-18-225, MCA. 

It is undisputed that Stevens is a nonviolent felony offender 

2 
pursuant to the statutory definition contained in 9 46-18-104(3), 

MCA, of "a person who has entered a plea of guilty to a felony 

offense other than a crime of violence or who has been convicted of 

a felony offense other than a crime of violence." It also is clear 

that § 46-18-201(10), MCA, imposes certain obligations on a court 

sentencing such an offender: 

In sentencing a nonviolent felony offender, the 

court shall first consider alternatives to imprisonment 

of the offender in the state prison, including placement 

of the offender in a community corrections facility or 

program. In considering alternatives to imprisonment, 

the court shall examine the sentencing criteria contained 

in 46-18-225. If the offender is subsequently sentenced 

to the state prison or a women's c~rrectional facility, 

the court shall state its reasons why alternatives to 

imprisonment were not selected, based on the criteria 

contained in 46-18-225. 

Nothing in the judgment or the remainder of the record before us 

indicates that the court considered alternatives to imprisonment in 

sentencing Stevens, as required by § 46-18-201(10), MCA. Nor, in 

sentencing Stevens to the state prison, did the District Court meet 

the second requirement of 5 46-18-201(10), MCA, namely, that it 

state its reasons why alternatives to imprisonment were not 

selected. Finally, the judgment does not affirmatively reflect 

that the criteria contained in 9 46-18-225, MCA--which pursuant to 

that statute's terms and the language of 5 46-18-201(10), MCA, 

quoted above--were taken into account by the court in any manner. 

In addition, Stevens specifically raised the issue of the 

court's authority, pursuant to § 46-18-222(6), MCA, to except him 

from the mandatory minimum sentence otherwise provided by law for 

a person convicted of felony sexual assault; he did so in a 
"sentencing memorandum" dated prior to the sentencing hearing. The 

District Court did not refer to or address this issue in its 

judgment. 

We hold that the District Court failed to properly sentence 

the defendant under applicable sentencing statutes. Because this 

case must be remanded for resentencing, we need not address the 

other sentence-related issues Stevens raises. 

REVERSED and REMANDED. 
June 21, 1993 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the following order was sent by United States mail, prepaid, to the 

following named: 

Timothy J. Lape 

Attorney at Law 

P.O. Box 8164 

Missoula, MT 59807-8164 

Hon. Joseph P. Mazurek, Attorney General 

Barbara C. Harris, Assistant 

Justice Bldg. 

Helena, MT 59620 

ROBERT L. DESCHAMPS, 111, County Attorney 

BETTY WING, Deputy County Attorney 

Missoula County Courthouse 

Missouta, MT 59802 

ED SMITH 

CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT 

STATE OF MONTANA