Title: STATE v TECCA
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 85-483
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: January 26, 1986

No. 85-483 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1986 THE STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Respondent, -vs- CHARLES TECCA, 111, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, In and for the County of Park, The Honorable Byron Robb, Judge presiding. COUNSEL OF RECORD: For Appellant: Knuchel & McGregor; Karl Knuchel, Livingston, Montana For Respondent: Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana Joe Roberts, Asst. Attorney General, Helena, Montana Robert Jovick, City Attorney, Livingston, Montana Submitted on Briefs: Dec. 18, 1985 Decided: January 26, 1986 Filed: JAN 2 8 1986 Mr. Justice Frank B. Morrison, Jr. delivered the Opinion of the Court. Defendant, Charles Tecca ITJ, appeals the August 13, 1985, order of the Sixth Judicial District Court dismissing his appeal to that court and remanding his appeal bond. We reverse. Defendant was convicted of three traffic offenses in Livingston City Court on July 17, 1985. On July 24, 1985, judgment and sentence were orally pronounced. Defendant's attorney filed a notice of appeal in City Court on July 29, 1985. That notice specified that the appeal woul-d be "to the Justice Court of the County of Park, State of Montana, before Deanna Egeland, Justice of the Peace." The appeal should have been to District Court. On August 7, 1985, eleven "working" days after judgment was issued, a correct notice of appeal was filed. Section 46-17-311(2), MCA, requires that a notice of intent to appeal from a judgment of a city or justice court be filed within ten days of the judgment. Therefore, the trial judge dismissed the appeal for failure to file a timely notice of appeal. We agree with the trial judge that the August 7, 1.985, notice of appeal was not timely. We have consistently given a strict construction to S 46-17-311, MCA, and will continue to do so. Our resolution of this appeal rests on the original notice of appeal. It was timely filed in the proper court. Therefore, the City Court had actual, timely notice of defendant's intent to appeal. Unfortunately, that notice of appeal was defective in that it specified the wrong court as the court of appeal. In a similar case, Adair v. Lake County Justice Court (Mont. 1984), 692 P.2d 13, 41 St.Rep. 2241, the notice of appeal specified that appeal would be to the Montana Supreme Court. Noting t h a t proper appeal should be t o t h e D i s t r i c t Court, w e granted t e n days from t h e d a t e of r e n i t t i t u r t o f i l e a s t a t u t o r i l y c o r r e c t n o t i c e o f appeal. The same remedy should be afforded defendant i n t h i s case. Accordingl.y, defendant is granted t e n days from t h e d a t e of r e m i t t i t u r of t h i s Court t o f i l e a c o r r e c t n o t i c e of appeal, pursuant t o S 46-17-31 W e concur: