No. 84-41 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

19 84 

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Respondent, 

-vsGEORGE GREEN, 

Defendant and Appellant. 

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Fourteenth Judicial District, 

In and for the County of Musselshell, 

The Honorable Roy Rodeghiero, Judge presiding. 

COUNSEL OF RECORD: 

For Appellant: 

George Green, pro se, Roundup, Montana 

For Respondent: 

Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana 

John L. Pratt, County Attorney, Roundup, Montana 

Filed: 

Submitted On Briefs: July 19, 1984 

Decided: August 15, 1984 

& */- 

Clerk 
Mr. Justice John C. Sheehy delivered the Opinion. of the 

Court. 

George Green appeals from his conviction of misdemeanor 

assault in the District Court, Fourteenth Judicial District, 

Musselshell County. Green had earlier been charged in the 

Justice Court in Roundup Township, of misdemeanor assault 

under section 45-5-201(1) (c), MCA, of purposely and knowingly 

making physical contact in an insulting and provoking manner 

against twelve-year-old Michael Fawcett, grabbing him by the 

arms, setting him down, and attempting to hypnotize him. He 

was convicted in Justice Court, and sentenced to ten days in 

jail and fined $500. He appealed to the District Court, 

where, after trial by the court, a jury having been waived, 

defendant was again found guilty of misdemeanor assault and 

sentenced by the District Court to five days in jail and a 

fine of $500. It is from the latter judgment that Green 

appeals. 

Mike Fawcett testified that on June 17, 1983, he went to 

the city park in Roundup for baseball practice. When he 

first arrived, he saw sitting in the bleachers, an associate 

of the defendant, Mary Okey Green, conducting a session with 

Fawcettqs young teammate, Jason Djernes. Afterward Jason 

told Mike that the session was "weird," that he went to 

Switzerland, Norway, and other exotic places like Hawaii. 

Mike testified that when ba-seball practice was finished, he 

walked toward his home and in so doing, passed close to 

George Green. Mike testified that Green grabbed him by the 

arms, and sat him down, and at this time, he was terrified. 

Green said, "Look at me, I can help you with your pitching." 

Then Green started counting, "One, deeper, deeper, deeper, 

deeper, two, float deeper, deeper, deeper, deeper," - et cetera 
through the numbers. Mike testified that while it was going 

on he felt scared. 

In the meantime, Susan Hewett, whose nephew had attended 

the baseball practice, learned from another young boy that 

someone was in the park hypnotizing people. She went to the 

city park, and in looking around, heard the voice of Green 

doing his routine on the other side of the trees. She 

attempted to go there but was intercepted by Mary Okey Green, 

who kept asking her whether she wished to engage in 

meditation. On the stand, Mary Okey Green admitted that she 

purposely intercepted Susan Hewett to keep her away from 

George Green while he was conducting his session with Mike. 

At any rate, Susan Hewett refused to be intercepted, made her 

way to Green and shouted what was he doing. He told her to 

be quiet. At this point Mike got up and ran from the scene. 

He testified that he was scared as he ran away. Mike also 

testified that Green grabbed for him as he started to run 

away and tried to keep him there. 

In defense, Green and Mary Okey Green denied that at any 

point Green had touched Mike or grabbed for him in conducting 

the session. Green's defense was that he teaches meditation 

and that meditation is a method of having the subconscious 

mind overcome the conscious mind, the latter of which Green 

characterizes as the "devil." He maintains that he had 

reached level 17 in counting with Mike, which Green states is 

the level of peace, and at trial, the record indicates he was 

disturbed, if not angry, at Susan Hewett for interrupting the 

proceedings. 

Green conducted his appeal without benefit of counsel. 

For that reason, we have examined the transcript of the 

record carefully, and the brief filed by Green. He raises 
two issues on appeal, whether there was sufficient evidence 

to justify his conviction of misdemeanor assault, and whether 

the District Court could properly order him to cease teaching 

meditation in public parks in the light of the First 

Amendment. 

Our powers of appellate review are the sa.me whether or 

not a defendant appealing from a criminal conviction is 

represented by counsel on the appeal. It may generally be 

stated that the Supreme Court does not try facts on appea.1, 

but determines whether a miscarriage of justice has been 

shown. State v. Stod.dard. (1966), 147 Mont. 402, 412 P.2d 

827. Disputed questions of fact and credibility will not be 

disturbed on appeal-. State v. Crockett (1966), 148 Mont. 

402, 421 P.2d 722. The credibility of witnesses and the 

weight to be assigned to their testimony is for the 

determination of District Court in a nonjury trial. See 

Matter of Jones (1978), 176 Mont. 412, 578 P.2d 1150. 

Disputed questions of fact will not be considered on appeal, 

State v. Messerl-y (1-952) , 126 Mont. 62, 244 P.2d 1054, and 

all conflicts are resolved on appeal. in favor of the 

judgment. State v. Cor (1964), 144 Mont. 323, 396 P.2d 86. 

If there is substantial evidence pointing to the judgment, 

that is, such relevant evidence as a. reasonable mind might 

a.ccept as adequate to support a conclusion, viewed in a light 

most favorable to the State, a conviction must be sustained. 

State v. Wilson (Mont. 1981), 631 P.2d 1273, 38 St.Rep. 1040. 

Under those appellate decisions, we find the testimony 

of Mike Fawcett is the kind of substantial evidence upon 

which this verdict must be sustained. 

The second issue raised by Green is that the court 

limited his First A-mendment right of free expression in 
ordering him not to engage voung people in meditation 

sessions without the consent or presence of their parents or 

guardians. In admonishing the defendant after passing 

judgment of guilt, the District Court told the defendant: 

"Your intentions originally may have been good, and 

maybe they have been good all along. But you have 

placed yourself in such a position, dealing with 

these young children without their guardian or 

parent around, you are taking the child's 

upbringing in your own hands without any permission 

or any say so by the parent or their guardian. And 

I don't know what they do in Denver or down that 

way, hut around_ here that's a no no. Do you 

understand that? 

"MR. GREEN: I understand." 

There is no need for us to pass on the propriety of the 

admonition although it seems to have been common sense advice 

to the defendant. The a.ppea1 here is from the judgment of 

conviction. The sentence which was levied against the 

defendant was that he serve five days in the county jail, and 

pay a fine of $500. He is not prevented under the sentence 

from any expression allowed him under the First Amendment. 

Affirmed. 

We Concur: