Opinion ID: 877465
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 17

Heading: the majority has erred in permitting the sentencing court to apply death penalty statutes to coleman which were enacted after the date of the crimes

Text: After our decision in Coleman I, the sentencing court again sentenced Coleman to death, but this time the court retroactively applied Montana death penalty statutes enacted after the date of the crimes. In Coleman II, Coleman claimed that application of these death penalty statutes violated the ex post facto clauses of the United States and Montana Constitutions. He further argued that this retroactive application of statutes violated certain Montana statutes designed especially to prohibit retroactive application of statutory provisions. In holding against Coleman, the majority stretched the law to the breaking point. 605 P.2d 1000, 1023-1026. I dissented on both grounds and concluded that the sentencing court and this Court had violated the United States and Montana Constitutions, as well as existing Montana statutes. 605 P.2d 1000, 1023-1026. Issues Z and AA, again raise these issues and, of course, Coleman again lost before the sentencing court and before this Court. In the omnibus ruling in Part IV, which decided against Coleman on this and 13 other issues by one stroke of the pen, the majority has declared this issue to be res judicata. I have stated my views once in Coleman II, and need not repeat them here. I would hold that we have violated the United States Constitution and our own constitution in retroactively applying the death penalty statutes, as well as violating statutes designed to prevent this very kind of unfairness. By properly applying the standards set out in United States v. Sanders, supra, I would again review this question and grant the relief requested.