Court Opinion

ID: 9381158
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-21 22:05:48.532286+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:30.271077
License: Public Domain

03/21/2023
                                             0:IGINAL
            IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA                                Case Number: OP 23-0158

                                       OP 23-0158

 SKYLER LEROY GRIEBEL,                                                    rilLED
              Petitioner,                                                  MAR   2 1 2023
                                                                                  Cireenwood
                                                                              -f
                                                                                           Court
                                                                         L->lata Of Montana
       v.
                                                                    ORDER
SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARK
COUNTY, HONORABLE RAY J. DAYTON,
Presiding,

              Respondent.

       Petitioner Skyler Leroy Griebel seeks a writ of supervisory control directing the
Sixth Judicial District Court, Lake County, to hold a hearing on Griebel's motion to dismiss
pursuant to Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 98 S. Ct. 2674 (1978), in its Cause No.
DC-22-33. We have amended Petitioner's caption to reflect the proper parties in this
original proceeding. M. R. App. P. 14.
       Supervisory control is an extraordinary remedy that is sometimes justified when
urgency or emergency factors exist making the normal appeal process inadequate, when
the case involves purely legal questions, and when the other court is proceeding under a
mistake of law and is causing a gross injustice, constitutional issues of state-wide
importance are involved, or, in a criminal case, the other court has granted or denied a
motion to substitute a judge. M. R. App. P. 14(3). Whether supervisory control is
appropriate is a case-by-case decision. Stokes v. Mont. Thirteenth Judicial Dist. Court,
2011 MT 182, ¶ 5, 361 Mont. 279, 259 P.3d 754 (citations omitted). Consistent with Rule
14(3), it is the Court's practice to refrain from exercising supervisory control when the
petitioner has an adequate remedy of appeal. E.g., Buckles v. Seventh Judicial Dist. Court,
No. OP 16-0517, 386 Mont. 393, 386 P.3d 545 (table) (Oct. 18, 2016); Lichte v. Mont.
Eighteenth Judicial Dist. Court. No. OP 16-0482, 385 Mont. 540, 382 P.3d 868 (table)
(Aug. 24, 2016).
       Griebel offers no argument as to why the normal appeal process would be
inadequate in this case. He thus has not met the threshold requirements for consideration
of a petition for writ of supervisory control under M. R. App. P. 14(3).
       IT IS THEFORE ORDERED that the petition for writ of supervisory control is
DENIED and DISMISSED.
       The Clerk is directed to provide immediate notice of this Order to counsel for
Petitioner, all counsel of record in the Sixth Judicial District Court, Park County, Cause
No. DC-22-33, and the HoTojable Ray J. Dayton, presiding.
       DATED this       tay of March, 2023.

                                                               Chief Justice

                                                                           ✓

                                                                  Justices

                                             2