D A 1 0

- 0 1 5 4 a n d D A 1 0

- 0 1 5 5

I N T H E S U P R E M E C O U

R T O F T H E S T

A T E O F M O N T

A N A

2 0 1 0 M T 2 0 5 N

C I T Y O F H E L E

N A

,

P l a i n t i f f a n d A p p e l l e e

,

v

.

B R A D L E Y W

. B R O U G H

,

D e f e n d a n t a n d A

p p e l l a n t

.

APPEAL FROM: Dist rict Court of the First Judicial District,

I n a n d F o r t h e C o u

n t y o f L e w i s a n d C l a r k

, C a u s e N o s

. B D C 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 4 a n d

C D C 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5

H o n o r a b l e J e f f r e y S h e r l o c k

, P r e s i d i

n g J u d g e

H o n o r a b l e K a t h y S e e l e y

, P r e s i d i n g J u d g e

C O U N S E L O F R E C O R D :

F o r A p p e l l a n t :

M a r t i n J

. E v e l a n d

, E v e l a n d L a w O f f i c e

, H e l e n a

, M o n t a n a

F o r A p p e l l e e :

S t e v e B u l l o c k

, M o n t a n a A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l

, M i c h e a l S

. W e l l e n s t e i n

, A s s i s t a n t A t t o r

n e y G e n e r a l

, H e l e n a

, M o n t a n a

D a v i d N i e l s e n

, H e l e n a C i t y A t t o r n e y

, D

. O l e O l s o n

, D e p u t y C i t y

A t t o r n e y

, H e l e n a

, M o n t a n a

S u b m i t t e d o n B r i e f

s : S e p t e m b e r 8

, 2 0 1 0

D e c i d e d : S e p t e m b e r 2 1

, 2 0 1 0

F i l e d :

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ C l e r k September 21 20102

J u s t i c e J a m e s C

. N e l s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t

.

¶ 1 P u r s u a n t t o S e c t i o n I

, P a r a g r a p h 3 ( d ) ( v

)

, M o n t a n a S u p r e m e C o u r t 1 9 9 6 I n t e r n a l

O p e r a t i n g R

u l e s

, a s a m e n d e d i n 2 0 0 6

, t h e f o l l o w i n g m e m o r a n d u m d e c i s i o n s h a l l n o t b e

c i t e d a s p r e c e d e n t

. I

t s h a l l b e f

i l e d a s a p u b l i c d o c

u m e n t w i t h t h e C l e r k o f t h e S u p r e m e

C o u r t a n d i t s c a s e t i t l e

, S u p r e m e C o u r t c a u s e n u m b e r

, a n d d i s p o s i t i o n s h a l l b e i n c l u d e d i n

this Court’ s quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and

Montana Reports.

¶ 2 T h i s a p p e a l s t e m s f r o m t w o p r o s e c u t i o n s o f B r a d l e y W

. B r o u g h w h i c h o r i g i n a t e d

i n H e l e n a C i t y C o u r t a n d t h e n

, f o l l o w i n g c o n v i c t i o n s i n e a c h c a s e

, w e r e a p p e a l e d t o t

h e

F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t C o u r t

, L e w i s a n d C l a r k C o u n t y

, f o r t r i a l s d e n o v

o

. T h e f i r s t c a s e

i n v o l v e d a c h a r g

e o f D U I a l l e g

e d t o h a v e b e e n c o m

m i t t e d o n M a y 9

, 2 0 0 8

. T h i s c a s e

w e n t t o t r i a l i n C i t y C o u r t o n J u n e 1 1

, 2 0 0 9

, a

n d t h e j u r y f

o u n d B r o u g

h g u i l t y

. T h e

s e c o n d c a s e i n v

o l v e d c h a r g e s o f D U I

, d r i v i n g w

h i l e l i c e n s e s u s p e n d e d o r r e v o k e d

,

r e c k l e s s d r i v i n g

, c a r e l e s s d r i v i n g

, o b s t r u c t i n g a p e a c e o f

f i c e r

, r e s i s t i n g a r r e s t

, a n d f l e e i n g

f r o m o r e l u d i n g a p e a c e o f f i c e r

, a l l a l l e g

e d t o h a v e o c c u r r e d o n o r a b o u

t D e c e m b e r 8

,

2 0 0 8

. T h i s c a s e w e n t t o t r i a l i n C i t y C o u r t o n J u n e 2

, 2 0 0 9

, a

n d t h e j u r y f o u n d B r o u g

h

g u i l t y o f a l l c h a r g

e s e x c e p t r e s i s t i n g a r r e s t

. O n J u n e 3 0

, 2 0 0 9

, B r

o u g h f i l e d h i s n o t i c e s o f

a p p e a l t o D i s t r i c t C o u r t i n b o t h c a s e s

.

¶ 3 The Clerk of District Court assigned the case involving the May 9, 2008 charge to

J u d g e S e e l e y u n d e r c a u s e n u m b e r C D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5

, a

n d a s s i g n e d t h e c a s e i n v

o l v i n g t h e

D e c e m b e r 8

, 2 0 0 8 c h a r g

e s t o J u d g e S h e r l o c k u n d e r c a u s e n u m b e r B D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 4

. B u

t

i n t h e c o p i e s o f t h e n o t i c e s o f a p p e a l t h a t w e r e f

o r w a r d e d t o t

h e c i t y p r o s e c u t o r

, t

h e C l e r k3

mistakenly reversed these designations and assign ed the December 8 charges to Judge

Seeley ’ s c o u r t u n d e r C D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5 a n d t h e M a y 9 c h a r g e t o J udge Sherlock ’s court

under BDC

- 2009

- 234

. A s a r e s u l t

, a l l o f t h e C i t y ’ s f

i l i n g s r e l a t i n g t o t h e D e c e m b e r 8

c h a r g e s w e r e f i l e d u n d e r c a u s e n u m

b e r C D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5

, a n d a l l o f i t s f i l i n g s r e l a t i n g t o

t h e M a y 9 c h a r g

e w e r e f i l e d u n d e r c a u s e n

u m b e r B D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 4

. F u r t h e r m o r e

, J

u d g e

S e e l e y s e t t r i a l i n C D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5 f o r J a n u a r y 1 9

, 2 0 1 0

, a n d J u d g e S h e r l o c k s e t t r i a l i n

B D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 4 f

o r J a n u a r y 2 5

, 2 0 1 0

. T h u s

, t h e p r o s e c u t o r m a d e p r e p a r a

t i o n s t o t r y t

h e

D e c e m b e r 8 c h a r g

e s o n J a n u a r y 1 9 a

n d to try the May 9 charge o n January 25.

¶ 4 O n J a n u a r y 1 4

, 2 0 1 0

, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t C l e r k d i s c o v e r e d t h e e r r o r r e g

a r d i n g t h e

c a u s e n u m

b e r s a n d n o t i f

i e d t h e p r o s e c u

t o r

. A s i d e f

r o m t h e charging documents , all of

the documents filed in Judge Seeley’s case related to the December 8 charge s , and all of

t h e d o c u m e n t s f

i l e d i n J u d g e S h e r l o c k ’ s c a s e r e l a t e d t o t h e M a y 9 c h a r g

e

. I n o r d e r t o

c o r r e c t t h e m

i s t a k e

, t h e p r o s e c u

t o r p r e p a r e d a s t i p u l a t i o n c a l l i n g f o r t h e C l e r k t o s i m

p l y

e x c h a n g e t h e c o m p l a i n t s b e t w e e n t h e t w o c o u r t f i l e s

. D e f e n s e c o u n s e l

, h o w e v

e r

, r e f u s e d

t o s i g n t h e s t i p u l a t i o n

. A c c o r d i n g l y

, o n J a n u a r y 1 9

, 2 0 1 0

, t h e p r o s e c u t o r f

i l e d a M o t i o n

t o C o r r e c t D i s t r i c t C o u r t R e c o r d

, a s k i n g t h e c o u r t t o e x c h a n g e t h e c o m

p l a i n t s b e t w e e n

t h e t w o f i l e s

. H e a l s o f

i l e d a s u p p o r

t i n g b r i e f i n w

h i c h h e e x

p l a i n e d t h e m

i x

- u p a s b e i n g

t h e r e s u l t o f a c l e r i c a l e r r o r

. T h e p r o s e c u t o r p o i n t e d o u t t h a t f o r m o n t h s

, u p u

n t i l J a n u a r y

1 4

, 2 0 1 0

, b o t h p a r t i e s h a d a s s u m e d t h a t t h e D e c e m

b e r 8 c h a r g

e s w e r e a s s i g

n e d t o J u d g e

S e e l e y a n d t h a t t h e M a y 9 c h a r g e w a s a s s i g

n e d t o J u d g e S h e r l o c k

. Nevertheless, d efense

cou nsel objected to the prosecutor’ s motion , arguing t h a t t h e C i t y ’ s p r o p o s a l t o e x c h a n g e4

the complaints constituted a substantive amendment of the charges and that under

§ 4 6

- 1 1

- 2 0 5

, M C A

, s u c h a n a m e n d m e n t w a s p r o h i b i t e d w i t h i n f i v e d a y s o f t r i a l

.

¶ 5 Prior to the commencement of Brough’s trial on January 19, Judge Seeley met

w i t h c o u n s e l a n d B r o u g h i n c h a m

b e r s t o d i s c u s s t h e C i t y ’ s m o t i o n a n d B r o u g h ’ s

o b j e c t i o n

. D e f

e n s e c o u n s e l s t a t e d t

h a t h e w a s p r e p a r e d f

o r t r i a l i n b o t h C D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5

a n d B D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 4

. I

n a d d i t i o n

, h e a c k

n o w l e d g e d t h a t

, aside from the complaint, every

f i l i n g i n J u d g e S e e l e y ’ s c o u r t u n d e r C D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5 p e r t a i n e d t o t h e D e c e m b e r 8 c h a r g

e s

.

B u t h e s t i l l o b

j e c t e d t o switching the complaints

, based on § 46

- 11

- 205, MCA.

¶ 6 Judge Seeley granted the prosecutor’s motion to correct the District Court record,

finding that the correction was not the type of “ amendment ” w i t h w h i c h § 4 6

- 1 1

- 2 0 5

,

M C A i s c o n c e r n e d

, a n d a l s o f i n d i n g t h a t B r

o u g h w a s n o t p r e

j u d i c e d b y t h e c o r r e c t i o n

.

T h e r e a f t e r

, o n J a n u a r y 2 1

, 2 0 1 0

, J u d g e S h e r l o c k i s s u e d a c o r r e s p o n d i n g o r d e r

t r a n s f e r r i n g t h e c o m

p l a i n t f o r t h e D e c e m

b e r 8 c h a r g

e s t o t h e C D C

- 2 0 0 9

- 2 3 5 f i l e

, a n d

t r a n s f e r r i n g t h e c o m

p l a i n t f o r t h e M a y 9 c h a r g

e t o t h e BDC

- 2009

- 234 file. O n January

20 , 2010, a j u r y i n J

u d g e S e e l e y ’ s c o u r t f

o u n d B r o u g h g u i l t y o f t h e D e c e m

b e r 8 c h a r g

e s

( e x c e p t r e s i s t i n g a r r e s t

, o f w h i c h h e w a s a c q u i t t e d i n t h e C i t y C o u r t )

. A n d o n J a n u a r y 2 5

,

2010, a jury in Judge Sherlock’s court found Brough guilty of the Ma y 9 charge.

¶ 7 B r o u g

h n o w a p p e a l s b o t

h c o n v i c t i o n s

, m a k i n g t h e s a m e a r g u m e n t s i n b o t h c a s e s

.

S p e c i f i c a l l y

, h e c o n t e

n d s t h a t e x c h a n g

i n g t h e c o m

p l a i n t s b e t w e e n t h e t w o c o u r t f i l e s

c o n s t i t u t e d a n a m e n d m e n t i n m a t t e r s o f s u b s t a n c e a n d t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t v

i o l a t e d

§ 4 6

- 1 1

- 2 0 5

, M C A

, a

n d o u r d e c i s i o n i n C

i t y o f R e d L o d g e v

. K e n n e d y

, 2 0 0 2 M T 8 9

, 3 0 9

M o n t

. 3 3 0

, 4 6 P

. 3 d 6 0 2

, b y a l l o w i n g s u c h a n a m e n d m e n t l e s s t h a n f i v e d a y s b e f

o r e t r i a l

.5

T h e S t a t e a r g

u e s t h a t t h e C i t y d i d n o t a m e n d t h e c o m p l a i n t s

. R a t

h e r

, i n s w i t c h i n g t h e

c o m p l a i n t s

, t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t s i m p l y c o r r e c t e d a c l e r i c a l m i s t a k e m a d e b y t h e D i s t r i c t

Court Clerk. The State also argues that Brough has not shown that he was prejudiced by

the District Court’s action.

¶ 8 W e h a v

e d e t e r m i n e d t o d e c i d e t h i s c a s e p u r s u a n t t o S e c t i o n I

, P a r a g r a p h 3 ( d ) o f

o u r 1 9 9 6 I

n t e r n a l O p e r a t i n g R

u l e s

, a s a m e n d e d i n 2 0 0 6

, w h i c h p r o v

i d e s f o r

m e m o r a n d u m o p i n i o n s

. I t i s m a n i f e s t o n t h e f

a c e o f t h e b r i e f

s a n d t h e r e c o r d b e f

o r e u s

that the District Court d i d n o t v i o l a t e § 4 6

- 1 1

- 2 0 5

, M C A

, a n d o u r d e c i s i o n i n K e n n e d y

.

¶ 9 A f f i r m e d

.

/ S / J A M E S C

. N E L S O N

W e C o n c u r :

/ S / P A T R I C I A C O T T E R

/ S / M I C H A E L E W H E A T

/ S / J I M R I C E

/ S / B R I A N M O R R I S