Court Opinion

ID: 9396941
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-23 23:06:42.160783+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:20.516425
License: Public Domain

ORIGINAL                                          05/23/2023

            IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
                                                                                           Case Number: DA 23-0100

                                       DA 23-0100
                                                                     FILEU
 STATE OF MONTANA,                                                    MAY 2 3 2023
                                                                    Bowen Greenwood
                                                                  Clerk of Supreme Court
             Plaintiff and Appellee.                                 State of Morytan

       v.                                                           ORDER

ANTHONY CRAIG WEIMER,

             Defendant and Appellant.

       Self-represented Appellant Anthony Craig Weimer petitions this Court for
rehearing of an April 11, 2023 Order, stating that this Court overlooked his question
concerning his request for stay and release. In the Order, this Court denied his various
requests: his motion to disqualify the Justices; his request for disclosure; his request for
emergency suspension of the rules, and his emergency motion to stay judgrnent and for
immediate release.
       Weimer puts forth that the District Court "should have stayed execution of sentence
pending appeal." He provides a copy of the District Court's order where, following the
March 29, 2023 hearing, the court denied his renewed motion to stay his sentence. He
states that the court's denial was due to Weimer not having a chemical or mental health
evaluation. Weimer alleges violations of due process of law at the hearing and missing
transcripts on appeal. He also requests copies of other documents from the court's record.
       Weimer has had two hearings in the District Court conceming his request for a stay
and his release pending appeal. The District Court explained that Weimer's citation to
§ 46-9-107, MCA, did not apply because the court's judgment did not impose a fine only
and a District Court, not a Justice Court, rendered the conviction and judgment.
Harmonizing § 46-9-107, MCA, with § 46-20-240(2), MCA, the District Court concluded
that "[a]dmittance to bail is thus a prerequisite to a stay." The court pointed out that
because Weimer did not cooperate with the presentence investigation report prior to
sentencing, the court had no information to determine Weimer's risks and needs in contrast
to the public's safety.
       Weimer has not provided any criteria, pursuant to M. R. App. P. 20(1), to warrant
rehearing. This Court considered Weimer's previous requests and provided the reasons for
denial in its Order. We point out that in a March 30, 2023 filing with this Court, Weimer
provided a copy of the State's motion concerning his transport to the District Court for the
hearing. His renewed arguments lack merit. We conclude again that Weimer is not entitled
to a stay of his sentence or release because the District Court is the appropriate venue to
entertain his motions. Upon review of this Court's docket, the transcripts were filed on
May 5, 2023. Weimer should have received the notice, re-sent on May 12 after being
returned. Since then, additional transcripts have been placed in his pending appeal.'
Weimer should receive another notice, sent on May 19, 2023.
       Weimer should place his arguments concerning his conviction and sentence in his
briefs on appeal. We further point out that Weimer's opening brief is due on or before
Monday, June 19, 2023. Therefore,
       IT IS ORDERED that Weimer's Petition for Rehearing is DENIED.
       IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Weimer's final request for other District Court
documents is GRANTED and the Clerk of the Supreme Court will mail copies of the listed
documents from the District Court record: #1, 2, 4, 14, 18, 22, 26, 28, 29, 100, 108, and
128, to Weimer at his last known address.
       The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to
Anthony Craig Weimer 1per4 onally.
       DATED this ?..Z       ay of May, 2023.

                                                                 Chief Justi ce

  In early April and May, 2023, the additional transcripts were inadvertently filed in Weimer's
"closed" appeal, No. DA 22-0537, because that case number was listed on the cover sheet.
                                               2
    Justices

3