Court Opinion

ID: 9369190
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-08 00:05:10.617947+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:13.491257
License: Public Domain

02/07/2023

            IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
                                                                                          Case Number: DA 22-0144

                                        DA 22-0144

 STATE OF MONTANA,                                                        FED 0 7 2':3
                                                                        lgown        .      d
                                                                           c, .;L.pf-errie Court
              Plaintiff and Appellee,                                    State of Montana

       v.
                                                                     ORDER
 ROBERT L. WITHEROW,

              Defendant and Appellant.

       On August 30, 2022, this Court entered an order remanding this matter to the District
Court to make appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding Defendant's
Robert L. Witherow's constitutional speedy-trial claim, which had been denied without a
written order. We stated that, upon entry of the District Court's order, Witherow would
have 30 days to file a supplemental appellant's brief, and appellate briefing would continue
thereafter in accordance with the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
       However, upon remand and consideration, the District Court "reluctantly concluded
that dismissal of the misdemeanor charge against Mr. Witherow is justified" and granted
his motion to dismiss. The District Court's order was entered January 11, 2023, and was
provided to this Court on February 1. Later that day, the Clerk of this Court entered a
notice that, in accordance with our order, Witherow had 30 days to file his supplemental
appellate briefing.
       However, Witherow has now prevailed in the District Court. Further, the only issue
he raised in this appeal was the speedy-trial issue. Thus, there is no need for the appeal to
continue. We thus deem it appropriate to dismiss the appeal without prejudice to either
party filing another appeal if they deem it necessary. Therefore,
       IT IS ORDERED that the appeal is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
       The Clerk of this Court is directed to mail copies hereof to counsel of record for the
parties, and to the District Court.
       DATED this          day of February, 2023.

                                                             Chief Justice

                                                                   Justices

                                             2