Court Opinion

ID: 9962905
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-23 23:06:25.604902+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:20:44.371037
License: Public Domain

j ORIGINAL                                           04/23/2024

            IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
                                                                                       Case Number: OP 24-0224

                                        OP 24-0224
                                                                        ALED
 DONALD DEAN GRANT,                                                     APR 2 3 2024
                                                                      Gowan Greenwood
                                                                    Clerk of Supreme Court
              Petitioner,                                              State of Montana

       v.
                                                                     Oft.DER
 JIM SALMONSEN, WARDEN,
 MONTANA STATE PRISON,

              Respondent.

       Self-represented Petitioner Donald Grant petitions this Court for a Writ of Habeas
Corpus, alleging illegal incarceration based on the lack of jurisdiction for his prosecution.
He posits: "The Court has failed in the past stating that its 5th Amendment of the
Constitution U.S. has not been extended to [persons] in the State[]s." Grant refers to our
decision in State v. MontgOmery, 2015 MT 151, ¶ 11, 379 Mont. 353, 350 P.3d 77, where
we pointed out that the U.S. Constitution's "Fifth Amendment's grand jury requirement
has not been construed to apply to the states." Montgomery, ¶ 9. He argues that the
Fourteenth Amendment "is and has been the controlling law and the protection of [h]is
rights." Grarit wants his immediate release and claims that court's judgment and sentence
are void.
       Grant is serving a 160-year prison sentence. This Court answered Grant's similar
question challenging his commencement prosecution last year. See Grant v. Salmonsen,
No. OP 23-0626, Order, at 2-3 (Mont. Nov. 14, 2023). We concluded that Grant is not
entitled to a writ of habeas corpus.
       We again conclude that Grant's arguments lack merit. In Montgomery, we pointed
to United States Supreme Court case law, distinguishing the grand jury requirement for
indictment in federal cases from the procedure used in state cases. Montgomery, ¶ 9 (citing
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 477 n.3, 120 S. Ct. 2348, 2355 n.3 (2000) (noting
that the Fourteenth Amendment "has not . . . been construed to include the Fifth
Amendment right to 'presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury. . . .'")).
       The Montana Legislature has provided a statutory scheme for felony prosecution,
and these statutes offer four inethods to commence a prosecution in this state, one of which
is "an information after leave of court has been granted[t            Montgomery, ¶ 11;
§ 46-11-101(3), MCA. In Montana, an information is one method to charge an offender
with a criminal offense—misdemeanor or felony—under statute. Section 46-11=101(3),
MCA. "‘[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).
       The State of Montana commenced Grant's felony prosecution according to
Montana's Constitution and under its applicable statutory scheme by filing an application
for leave of court to file charges by information, along with an affidavit supported by
evidence. Section 46-11-201(2), MCA (1981). See also Montgomery, ¶¶ 9-11; Mont.
Const. art. II, § 20(1); §§ 46-11-101(3), and 46-11-102(1), MCA. The District Court had
subject matter jurisdiction, and the court's judgment is not void.          Grant has not
demonstrated illegal incarceration. Section 46-22-101(1), MCA. He has a lawful sentence,
and he is not entitled to his release. Therefore,
       IT IS ORDERED that Grant's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and
DISMISSED.
       IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is CLOSED as of this Order's date.
       The Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and to
Donald Grant personally.
      DATED this C--3 day of April, 2024.

                                                               Chief Justice

                                              2
\

    3