ORIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 23-0438 

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff, Respondent, and Appellee, 

v. 

STRAUSIE LEIA HART, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

FILED 

AUG 2 2 2023 

Bowen Greenwood 

Clerk of Supreme Court 

State of Montana 

ORDER 

Strausie Leia Hart has filed a verified Petition for an Out-of-Time Appeal, stating 

that she believes a conflict of interest exists between the presiding District Court Judge and 

her underlying proceeding in the Justice Court of Lewis and Clark County. Hart states that 

she did not have the opportunity to respond to the State's motion to dismiss her appeal in 

the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County. She includes a copy of the 

judgment she seeks to appeal, a March 29, 2023 order by which the District Court 

dismissed Hart's appeal without prejudice and remanded the record to Justice Court. 

We secured copies of the register of actions and the pertinent documents from the 

District Court. On March 28, 2023, the State, through the County Attorney's office, moved 

the District Court for dismissal on the ground that Hart did not appeal a final judgment of 

conviction. The State explained that Hart's case went to trial on August 9, 2022. During 

the course of trial, the court declared a mistrial. Hart moved to dismiss, invoking her right 

against double jeopardy. The Justice Court denied the motion and rescheduled the trial for 

May 30, 2023. It vacated that trial after Hart filed her notice of appeal to the District Court. 

The State argued that there was no final judgment of conviction, rendering Hart's appeal 

premature. The District Court agreed and dismissed the appeal. 

M. R. App. P. 4(6) allows this Court to grant an out-of-time appeal "[i]n the 

infrequent harsh case and under extraordinary circumstances amounting to a gross 

08/22/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0438
miscarriage ofjustice[.]" Upon review of the available information, we conclude that Hart 

is not entitled an out-pf-time appeal. 

This Court has held that "appeals of a double jeopardy issue from a court of limited 

jurisdiction to a district court are permitted as a 'narrow exception[]' to the general rules 

governing de novo appeals to the district court." State v. BurtOn, 2017 MT 306, ¶ 19, 389 

Mont. 499, 407 P.3d 280 (citation omitted)! We held in Burton, ¶ 19, that "pre-judgment 

double jeopardy rulings entered by a court of limited jurisdiction can, following appeal to 

the district court, be brought to this Court only by way of a petition for a writ of supervisory 

control." It is not clear from Hart's filings whether she sought appeal in the District Court 

of the double jeopardy ruling or for some other reason. Either way, however, Hart does 

not have a present right to appeal the District Court's dismissal order. 

Hart's option to seek review of a decision on the double jeopardy issue would be to 

file a petition for writ of supervisory control in this Court. See Burton, ¶ 19. For any other 

issue, lain appeal may be taken by the defendant only from a final judgment of conviction 

and orders after judgment which affect the substantial rights of the defendant." Section 

46-20-104, MCA. Hart does not have a "final judgment of conviction" because there has 

been no "adjudication by a court that [Hart] is guilty or not guilty." Section 46-1-202(11), 

MCA. Because Hart appears to be represented by counsel in the underlying case, we 

decline to treat her Petition for Out-of-Time appeal as a petition for writ under 

M. R. App. P. 14(3). 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Hart's Petition for an Out-of-Time Appeal is 

DENIED and DISMISSED. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to the First Judicial District 

Court; to all counsel of record in the District Court proceedings; and to Strausie Leia Hart 

personally. 

We note that the Lewis and Clark County Justice Court is a court of record; as such, rather than 

a de novo appeal, Hart's appeal to District Court "is confined to review of the record and questions 

of law, subject to the supreme court's rulemaking and supervisory authority." Section 

3-10-115(1), MCA. 

2 
eta 

DATED this C. day of August, 2023. 

Chief Justice 

/1474-4- /1)4‘%-

Justices 

3