# ORIGINAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA OP 22-0309
TIMOTHY ERIC RITESMAN,

Petitioner,
v. STATE OF MONTANA, FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, HON. EDWARD P. McLEAN, Presiding,

Respondents. 

### JUN 2 8 2022
Li< 'v., 1 1 C. . .v.

, Court Oi IVIontana ORDER

Representing himself, Timothy Eric Ritesman has filed a "Notice of Filing of Petition for Supervisory Control," deemed a Petition for Writ of Supervisory Control, pursuant toM. R.App.P. 14(3). Ritesman contendsthatmorethantwoyearshave elapsed since anything has occurred in his proceeding for postconviction relief. We amend the caption to include the Fourth Judicial District Court, Missoula County, and the presiding Judge. Supervisory control may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis. "This extraordinary remedy can be invoked when the case involves purely legal questions and urgent or emergency factors make the normal appeal process inadequate." State v. Spady, 2015 MT 218, ¶ 11, 380 Mont. 179, 354 P.3d 590 (citing M. R. App. P. 14(3); Reddingv. McCarter, 2012 MT 144,

## ¶ 17, 365 Mont. 316, 281 P.3d 189). "The case must meet one ofthree additional criteria: (a) [T]he other court is proceeding under a mistake oflaw and is causing a gross injustice; (b) [C]onstitutional issues of state-wide importance are involved; or (c) [T]he other court has granted or denied a motion for substitution ofajudge in a criminal case." Spady, ¶ 11 (quoting M. R. App. P. 14(3)(a)-(c)). Ritesman includes a copy ofthe register ofactions for his pending matter, initiated in2018,to demonstrate that nothinghas occurred sinceAugust 2020. Heraisescomplaints 06/28/2022

Case Number: OP 22-0309about a biased judge, prosecutorial misconduct, and ineffective assistance of counsel,

among other claims. He states that he has newly discovered evidence and argues constitutional violations. We secured a more recent copy of the court's register of actions. Ritesman is mistaken that nothing has occurred in the last two years. We point to the court's May 16, 2022 MinuteEntry and Order. The court held a hearing concerningRitesman'srequest for substitution of counsel. Toward the conclusion, Ritesman stated that he would seek supervisory control. The court issued an order granting immunity to Ritesman's counsel for revealing any confidential information in answertothe court'squestions at thehearing. The court granted counsel's motion to withdraw and directed him to notify the public defender's conflict office to have new counsel appointed. Ritesman is not entitled to a writ ofsupervisory control over the District Court. He has not demonstrated that the District Court is proceeding upon a mistake oflaw, causing a gross injustice. M. R. App. P. 14(3)(a). Ritesman has not shown urgency or that his remedy ofa normal appeal is inadequate. Spady,¶ 11;M.R.App. P. 14(3). Ritesmanmay not agree with theoutcome or howhis matter is proceeding,but thecase ismovingforward in District Court. Section 46-21-201, MCA. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Ritesman's Petition for Writ of Supervisory Control is DENIED and DISMISSED. The Clerk ofthe Supreme Court is directed to provide a copy ofthis Order to the Honorable Ed McLean (Ret.), Fourth Judicial District Court; to Shirley E. Faust, Clerk of District Court, Missoula County, under Cause No. DV-2018-829; to Matt Jennings, Missoula County Attorney's Office; to Tobias J. Cook, Ritesman's Counsel; and to Timothy Eric Ritesman. DATED this Z(t

day ofJune, 2022.

ChiefJustice

2

# ,?f



# ,yr Justices

3