Title: FELIX v MOHLER
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 81-340
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: November 12, 1981

No. 81-340 I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1 9 8 1 AARON F E L I X , P e t i t i o n e r , MEL MOHLER, DIRECTOR, SWAN RIVER YOUTH FOREST CAMP, FOR THE STATE OF MONTANA, R e s p o n d e n t . ORIGINAL PROCEEDING: For P e t i t i o n e r : P a t t e r s o n , M a r s i l l o , T o r n a b e n e & Schuyler, M i s s o u l a , M o n t a n a For R e s p o n d e n t : Hon. M i k e G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , B e l e n a , M o n t a n a E d w a r d L. M c L e a n , D e p u t y C o u n t y A t t o r n e y , M i s s o u l a , M o n t a n a S u b m i t t e d on B r i e f s : O c t o b e r 2 2 , 1 9 8 1 D e c i d e d : N o v e m b e r 1 2 , 1 9 8 1 Filed: NOV 1 2 198f' M r . J u s t i c e Frank B. Morrison, Jr., d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. P e t i t i o n e r , Aaron F e l i x , a p p l i e s f o r a w r i t of habeas corpus stemming from an order of t h e Fourth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t Court entered on May 27, 1981. This order revoked a t h r e e year deferred sentence given p e t i t i o n e r on May 22, 1978 and imposed a t h r e e and one-half year sentence a t t h e Montana S t a t e Prison upon p e t i t i o n e r . P e t i t i o n e r was convicted of t h e f t , a felony, i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court of t h e Fourth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Missoula County. On May 22, 1978, he was given a t h r e e year deferred imposition of sentence on t h e condition t h a t r e s t i t u t i o n be made. On August 20, 1979, t h i s deferred sentence w a s continued and p e t i t i o n e r was ordered t o complete r e s t i t u t i o n by November 5, 1980. P e t i t i o n e r f a i l e d t o comply with t h i s order by November 5, 1980, and a p e t i t i o n t o revoke p e t i t i o n e r ' s deferred sentence was f i l e d on January 16, 1981. A hearing on t h i s p e t i t i o n was held May 27, 1981, t h r e e years and f i v e days a f t e r t h e i n i t i a l d e f e r r a l . A t t h i s hearing, p e t i t i o n e r moved t o dismiss t h e proceeding on t h e grounds t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court w a s without j u r i s d i c t i o n . The D i s t r i c t Court overruled p e t i t i o n e r ' s o b j e c t i o n concluding t h a t t h e Court r e t a i n s " . . . j u r i s d i c t i o n (when) t h e p e t i t i o n i s f i l e d within t h e ( d e f e r r a l ) time." The D i s t r i c t Court sentenced p e t i t i o n e r t o t h r e e and one-half years i n t h e Montana S t a t e Prison. P e t i t i o n e r has been incarcerated s i n c e , e i t h e r a t t h e Montana S t a t e Prison o r t h e Swan River Youth F o r e s t Camp. P e t i t i o n e r raises t h e following i s s u e : 1) Whether a D i s t r i c t Court r e t a i n s j u r i s d i c t i o n t o revoke a deferred imposition of sentence beyond t h e t i m e period of d e f e r r a l i f a p e t i t i o n t o revoke i s timely f i l e d ? I n S t a t e v. P o r t e r (1964), 143 Mont. 528, 540, 541, 391 P.2d 704, 711, t h i s Court s t a t e d t h a t : " [ t l h i s s t a t e i s committed t o t h e doc- t r i n e t h a t once a v a l i d sentence has been pronounced, t h e c o u r t imposing t h e same i s lacking i n j u r i s d i c t i o n t o vacate o r modify t h e sentence, except as otherwise provided - by s t a t u t e . . ." (Emphasis added. ) Section 46-18-203, MCA, i s a s p e c i f i c procedural s t a t u t e granting judges, magistrates, o r j u s t i c e s of t h e peace a u t h o r i t y t o revoke a suspended sentence o r impose sentence following a deferred imposition of sentence. Section 46-18- 203, MCA, provides: "Revocation of suspended o r deferred sentence. A judge, magistrate, o r j u s t i c e of t h e peace who has suspended t h e execu- t i o n of a sentence o r deferred t h e imposi- t i o n of a sentence of imprisonment under 46-18-201 o r h i s successor i s authorized, during - t h e period of the suspended sentence o r deferred imposition of sentence, his - d i s c r e t i o n , to revoke - the suspension - o r impose sentence and order the person E- mitted. H e may a l s o , i n h i s d i s c r e t i o n , order t h e prisoner placed under t h e j u r i s - d i c t i o n of t h e board of pardons as provid- ed by law o r r e t a i n such j u r i s d i c t i o n with h i s court. P r i o r t o t h e revocation of an order suspending o r d e f e r r i n g t h e imposition of sentence, t h e person a f f e c t e d s h a l l be given a hearing." (Emphasis added.) This a u t h o r i t y must be exercised i n accordance with t h e p r e c i s e provisions of t h i s s e c t i o n ; a c t i o n by a judge, magistrate, o r j u s t i c e of t h e peace o u t s i d e t h e provisions of Section 46-18-203, MCA, i s without j u r i s d i c t i o n . S t a t e y. P o r t e r , supra. The c o n t r o l l i n g language i n Section 46-18-203, MCA, i s ". . . during t h e period of such suspended sentence o r deferred imposition of sentence. . ." Determining t h e meaning of t h i s phrase disposes of t h i s p e t i t i o n . I t i s well s e t t l e d t h a t i f a ". . . s t a t u t e i s p l a i n , unambiguous, d i r e c t and c e r t a i n , t h e s t a t u t e speaks f o r i t s e l f and t h e r e i s nothing l e f t f o r t h e c o u r t t o construe." Shannon v. Keller (1980), Mont. , 612 P.2d 1293, 1294, 37 S t . Rep. 1079, 1081. Such i s t h e case before t h i s Court. The words "during t h e period" a r e extremely p l a i n and unambiguous. The c l e a r import i s t h a t a c o u r t i s vested with j u r i s d i c t i o n t o revoke a suspended o r deferred sentence only during t h e running of t h e suspended o r deferred sentence. Once such time has expired a c o u r t is without j u r i s d i c t i o n t o decide p e t i t i o n s f o r revocation f i l e d by t h e S t a t e . The S t a t e requests t h i s Court t o construe Section 46- 18-203, MCA, t o mean t h a t a timely f i l e d p e t i t i o n f o r revocation v e s t s j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e Court, r e g a r d l e s s whether t h e hearing on such p e t i t i o n i s held a f t e r t h e suspended o r deferred sentence has expired. The S t a t e r e l i e s on decisions from Nevada and Oklahoma i n support of t h i s contention. See Sherman v. Warden, Nevada S t a t e Prison (1978) Nev. , 581 P.2d 1278; Degraffenreid v. S t a t e (1979), 0k.Cr. , 599 P.2d 1107. These a u t h o r i t i e s a r e not i n point. Nevada and Oklahoma have s t a t u t o r y provisions which v e s t j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e c o u r t s f o r purposes of revocation of suspended o r d e f e r r e d sentences upon t h e f i l i n g of a p e t i t i o n f o r revocation. Therefore a timely f i l e d p e t i t i o n of revocation i n t h e s e s t a t e s v e s t s j u r i s d i c t i o n i n c o u r t s when t h e t i m e of t h e suspended o r deferred sentence has run. Montana ' s s t a t u t e p e r t a i n i n g t o revocations of suspended o r deferred sentences, Section 46-18-203, MCA, contains no language s t a t i n g t h a t a timely f i l e d p e t i t i o n f o r revocation invokes a c o u r t ' s j u r i s d i c t i o n over t h e s e matters. I t i s axiomatic t h a t t h i s Court cannot i n s e r t what t h e l e g i s l a t u r e has n o t s t a t u t o r i l y included. Section 1-2-101, MCA. I n conclusion, w e hold t h a t Section 46-18-203, MCA, g r a n t s j u r i s d i c t i o n t o judges, magistrates, o r j u s t i c e s of t h e peace t o revoke suspended sentences o r impose sentences following deferred sentences only during t h e period of t h e suspended o r deferred sentences. This j u r i s d i c t i o n extends only through t h e running of the suspended o r deferred sentence, r e g a r d l e s s of whether a p e t i t i o n f o r revocation has been f i l e d p r i o r t o t h e termination of t h e suspended o r deferred sentence. Therefore, p e t i t i o n e r ' s r e q u e s t f o r a W r i t of Habeas Corpus i s granted. I t i s hereby ordered t h a t such w r i t i s s u e immediately and t h a t p e t i t i o n e r be discharged from t h e custody of t h e Swan River Youth F o r e s t Camp. W e concur: Chief J u s t i c e