Court Opinion

ID: 9393384
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-09 23:04:58.567019+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:52.933629
License: Public Domain

05/09/2023

            IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
                                                                                        Case Number: OP 23-0240

                                        OP 23-0240
                                                                            F
 DALE E. ULRICH,                                                             MAY 0 9 2023
                                                                           Bowen Greenwood
                                                                         Clerk of Supreme Court
              Petitioner,                                                   State of Montana

       v.
                                                                    ORDER
 PETER BLUDWORTH, Warden,
 Crossroads Correctional Center,

              Respondent.

       Self-represented Dale Ulrich has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,
challenging the cornmencement of prosecution. Ulrich argues that his constitutional rights
have been violated.     Ulrich states that "[u]nder the grand jury clause of the fifth
arnendment, a defendant has a right to be tried only on the grand jury's indictment." U.S.
v. Olson, 925 F.2d 1170, 1175 (9th Cir. 1991) (citation omitted). Ulrich explains that he
was entitled to be prosecuted by a grand jury indictment and that "the use of Information
is restricted to misdemeanors." He further states: "the Legislature of the State of Montana
has failed to specifically provide by statute, that information could be used to prosecute a
felony[.]" He contends that he is unlawfully incarcerated and has an unlawful conviction.
He states that the charges against him are void and must be dismissed.
       Ulrich refers to two criminal cases; however, only one case could be located.
According to available electronic records, on December 14, 2011, the Dawson County
District Court committed Ulrich to the Montana State Prison upon his guilty pleas to twelve
felony counts of incest. The District Court dismissed the remaining fourteen counts. The
commission of the offenses occurred in 2006 and until July 2010. The court imposed
concurrent terms of sixty years with twenty years suspended and a parole ineligibility
restriction of fifteen years. Ulrich did not appeal.
       Ulrich's claims have no merit. His references to federal law concerning grand juries
do not apply to states. "` [T]he Fifth Amendment's grand jury requirement has not been
construed to apply to the states.'" State v. Montgomery, 2015 MT 151, ¶ 9, 379 Mont. 353,
350 P.3d 77 (quoting U.S. v. Allen, 406 F.3d 940, 942 (8th Cir. 2005)). In Montgomery,
this Court held that "Montana statutes offer four methods to commence a prosecution in
this state, one of which is indictment by a grand jury. Sections 46-11-101(1)-(4), MCA."
Montgomery, ¶ 11.        "`[A] defendant is not entitled to any specific procedure.'"
Montgomery, ¶ 11 (citing State v. Haller, 2013 MT 199, ¶ 8, 371 Mont. 86, 306 P.3d 338)
(internal citation omitted). If the State commences prosecution by filing an application and
an affidavit that identifies supporting evidence demonstrating probable cause, the district
court has subject matter jurisdiction to proceed "as stated in Mont. Const. art. VII, § 4(1)
and § 3-5-302(1)(a), MCA[.]" Montgomery, ¶ 11. The Montana Legislature has provided
a statutory scheme for prosecution.
       Ulrich is not entitled to his release or dismissal of the charges. He brings these
challenges too late. He could have raised these issues in an appeal, yet he did not appeal
his conviction and sentence.I "The writ of habeas corpus is not available to attack the
validity of the conviction or sentence of a person who has been adjudged guilty of an
offense in a court of record and has exhausted the remedy of appeal."                    Section
46-22-101(2), MCA. By not appealing, he has exhausted his appeal rights. Lott v. State,
2006 MT 279, ¶¶ 4, 19, 334 Mont. 270, 150 P.3d 337.
        Ulrich cannot demonstrate a facially invalid sentence. Lott, ¶ 22. The State of
Montana commenced Ulrich's felony prosecution according to Montana's Constitution and
under its applicable statutory scheme by filing an application which includes an
information for leave of court and an affidavit supported by evidence.                  Section
46-11-201(2), MCA (2005), (2007), and (2009). See also Montgomery, ¶¶ 9-11; Mont.

   Through counsel, Ulrich appealed the denial of his petition for postconviction relief in this
Court; however, this Court ultimately dismissed his appeal, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967), and § 46-8-103(2), MCA. Ulrich v. State, No. DA 12-0684, Order
(Mont. Aug. 28, 2013).

                                               2
Const. art. II, § 20(1); §§ 46-11-101(3), and 46-11-102(1), MCA. The District Court had
subject rnatter jurisdiction, and Ulrich's Judgment is not void. He has a lawful sentence,
and he is not illegally incarcerated. Therefore,
       IT IS ORDERED that Ulrich's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and
DISMISSED.
       The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to
Dale Ulrich personallk
       DATED this          day of May, 2023.

                                                           ige

                                                   ;s L,                      „,r2
                                                                 Justices