BAILEY v STATE

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 12579 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O M N A A F F OTN 1973 E L O D CARL BAILEY, LW O P l a i n t i f f and Respondent, STATE O MONTANA, and W. E. DOWLIN, J R . F JUSTICE OF THE PEACE OF THE BILLINGS TOWNSHIP, , Defendant and A p p e l l a n t . Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e T h i r t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable R o b e r t H . Wilson, J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . Counsel o f Record: For Appellant : Hon. R o b e r t L. Woodahl, A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana Thomas B e e r s , A s s i s t a n t A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , a r g u e d , Helena, Montana Harold F. H a n s e r , County A t t o r n e y , B i l l i n g s , Montana D o r i s M. P o p p l e r , Deputy County A t t o r n e y , a r g u e d , B i l l i n g s , Montana F o r Respondent: R o b e r t C . Brogan a r g u e d , B i l l i n g s , Montana Submitted: Decided : Filed : DEC 2 1 1973 November 29, 1973 bEC 2 7 1973 M r . J u s t i c e Wesley C a s t l e s d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court. This i s an appeal by t h e S t a t e from an o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t of t h e t h i r t e e n t h j u d i c i a l d i s t r i c t , t h e Honorable Robert H. Wilson, p r e s i d i n g , which order granted a w r i t denominated andam am us", l a t e r c o r r e c t e d t o Supervisory Control, ordering a j u s t i c e of t h e peace t o honor an a f f i d a v i t of d i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n and c a l l i n another j u s t i c e of t h e peace. A defendant, one Ellwood Carl Bailey, was charged with "driving while under t h e i n f l u e n c e of i n t o x i c a t i n g liquor". He appeared i n j u s t i c e c o u r t , B i l l i n g s Township, Yellowstone County, b e f o r e W. E. Dowlin, Jr.; pleaded "not g u i l t y " on March 6 , 1973; and requested a j u r y t r i a l . 1 7 , 1973. T r i a l was set f o r A p r i l O March 13, 1973, an a f f i d a v i t of d i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n n was f i l e d . J u s t i c e of t h e Peace Dowlin refused t o honor t h e disqualification affidavit. The t r i a l d a t e was r e s e t f o r May 18, 1973. On A p r i l 19, 1973, a p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t of mandate was f i l e d i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t seeking an a l t e r n a t i v e w r i t t o compel J u s t i c e of t h e Peace Dowlin t o e i t h e r honor t h e d i s q u a l i f i c a t i o n o r appear t o show cause why he should n o t . On May 11, a hearing was held and t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t granted a w r i t of mandamus which w r i t ordered Judge Dowlin t o honor t h e a f f i d a v i t of d i s q u a l i f i c a tion. On June 5 , n o t i c e of appeal was f i l e d by t h e county a t t o r n e y on behalf of Judge Dowlin. On June 22, t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Judge Wilson, denied ~ a i l e y ' smotion t o t a x c o s t s including a t t o r n e y fees. I n t h a t o r d e r , Judge Wilson s t a t e d t h a t t h e w r i t was one of supervisory c o n t r o l , r a t h e r than t e c h n i c a l l y mandamus, and t h e r e f o r e denied a t t o r n e y f e e s . The defendant Bailey i n t h e crim- i n a l charge was denominated a " p l a i n t i f f " i n t h e a c t i o n seeking a writ. He "cross appeals" h e r e , seeking a t t o r n e y f e e s and c o s t s a g a i n s t J u s t i c e of t h e Peace Dowlin, denominated a "defendant". The i s s u e s on appeal a r e t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d i n g r a n t i n g a w r i t of mandamus because: (1) A j u s t i c e of t h e peace cannot be d i s q u a l i f i e d f o r p r e j u d i c e , b u t r a t h e r t h e remedies a r e l i m i t e d t o appeal and change of t h e place of t r i a l ander s e c t i o n s 95-2009 and 95-2003, R.C.M. 1947. (2) Mandamus i s an i n a p p r o p r i a t e remedy i f a j u s t i c e of t h e peace r e f u s e s t o d i s q u a l i f y himself o r r e f u s e s t o change t h e place of t r i a l . A s t o t h e second i s s u e , we have s t a t e d h e r e t o f o r e t h a t i n t h e order denying c o s t s and a t t o r n e y f e e s , the d i s t r i c t judge s t a t e d t h e w r i t was one of supervisory c o n t r o l i n t h e a i d of i t s a p p e l l a t e j u r i s d i c t i o n over j u s t i c e c o u r t s under s e c t i o n 95-2009, R.C.M. 1947. This would be c o r r e c t because t h e w r i t of mandamus i s a v a i l a b l e only where t h e r e i s no p l a i n , speedy and adequate remedy i n t h e ordinary course of law. Section 93-9103, R.C.M. 1947. Section 95-2009, R.C.M. 1947, provides: "(a) A l l c a s e s on appeal from j u s t i c e s ' o r p o l i c e c o u r t s must be t r i e d anew i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t and may be t r i e d before a j u r y of s i x (6) which may be drawn from e i t h e r t h e r e g u l a r panel o r j u r y box No. 3. "(b) The defendant may appeal t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t by giving w r i t t e n n o t i c e of h i s i n t e n t i o n t o appeal w i t h i n t e n days (10) days a f t e r judgment. "(c) Within t h i r t y (30) days t h e e n t i r e record of t h e j u s t i c e o r p o l i c e c o u r t proceedings s h a l l be t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t o r t h e appeal s h a l l be dismissed. It s h a l l be t h e duty of t h e defendant t o p e r f e c t t h e appeal." Thus a p l a i n , speedy and adequate remedy a t law i s s p e c i f i c a l l y provided and mandamus w i l l n o t l i e . A s t o i s s u e ( I ) , keeping i n mind s e c t i o n 95-2009, R.C.M. 1947, quoted above, a "prejudiced" judge, a s d i s t i n g u i s h e d from a "prejudiced" township o r community, may be allevia'ted o r corr e c t e d by an appeal and a t r i a l de novo. Chapter 20, T i t l e 95, R.C.M. P o l i c e Court Proceedings". 1947, i s e n t i t l e d " J u s t i c e and The Criminal Law Commission comment accompanying t h e c h a p t e r reads i n p a r t : h his Chapter includes only those s e c t i o n s which a r e p e c u l i a r o r apply e x c l u s i v e l y t o j u s t i c e and police courts. ' *** Included i n Chapter 20 i s s e c t i o n 95-2003, R.C.M. 1947, which provides : "(a) The defendant o r prosecution, before t r i a l , may move f o r a change of place of t r i a l on t h e ground t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s i n t h e township i n which t h e charge i s pending such p r e j u d i c e t h a t a f a i r t r i a l cannot be had i n such township. "(b) The motion s h a l l be i n w r i t i n g and supported by a f f i d a v i t which s h a l l s t a t e t h e f a c t s showing t h e n a t u r e of t h e prejudice a l l e g e d . The defendant o r t h e s t a t e may f i l e c o u n t e r a f f i d a v i t s . The c o u r t s h a l l conduct a hearing and determine t h e merits of t h e motion. " & ) I f t h e c o u r t determines t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s i n t h e township where t h e prosecution i s pending such p r e j u d i c e t h a t a f a i r t r i a l cannot be had i t s h a l l t r a n s f e r t h e cause t o any o t h e r c o u r t of competent j u r i s d i c t i o n i n any township where a f a i r t r i a l may be had." Also included i n Chapter 20 i s s e c t i o n 95-2009 --Appeal-previously quoted, which g i v e s a r i g h t of t r i a l de novo i n t h e d i s t r i c t court. S i g n i f i c a n t l y no s e c t i o n providing f o r s u b s t i t u - t i o n of judges appears i n Chapter 20. I n Chapter 17, T i t l e 95, R.C.M. 1947, e n t i t l e d " P r e t r i a l ~ o t i o n s " , appears s e c t i o n 95-1709 - - S u b s t i t u t i o n of judge--; and s e c t i o n 95-1710 --Change of place of t r i a l . Those two s e c t i o n s read : "95-1709. S u b s t i t u t i o n of Judge. (a) The defendant o r t h e prosecution may move t h e c o u r t i n w r i t i n g f o r a s u b s t i t u t i o n of judge on t h e ground t h a t he cannot have a f a i r and i m p a r t i a l The motion s h a l l hearing o r t r i a l b e f o r e s a i d judge. be made a t l e a s t f i f t e e n days p r i o r t o t h e t r i a l of t h e c a s e , o r any r e t r i a l thereof a f t e r appeal, except f o r good cause shown. Upon t h e f i l i n g of such a mot i o n t h e judge a g a i n s t whom t h e motion i s f i l e d s h a l l be without a u t h o r i t y t o a c t f u r t h e r i n t h e c r i m i n a l a c t i o n , motion o r proceeding b u t t h e provisions of t h i s s e c t i o n do n o t apply t o t h e arrangement of t h e calendar, t h e r e g u l a t i o n of t h e o r d e r of business, t h e power of t r a n s f e r r i n g t h e c r i m i n a l a c t i o n o r proceeding t o some o t h e r c o u r t , n o r t o t h e power of c a l l i n g i n another judge t o s i t and a c t i n such c r i m i n a l a c t i o n o r proceeding, providing t h a t no judge s h a l l so arrange t h e calendar a s t o d e f e a t t h e purposes of t h i s a c t i o n . Not more than one judge can be d i s q u a l i f i e d i n t h e c r i m i n a l a c t i o n o r proceeding, a t t h e i n s t a n c e of t h e prosecution and n o t more than one judge a t t h e i n s t a n c e of t h e defendant o r defendants. 11 I f e i t h e r p a r t y i n any matter above-mentioned s h a l l f i l e t h e a f f i d a v i t a s h e r e i n provided such p a r t y may n o t complain of any reasonable delay a s t h e res u l t thereof. "The provision of t h i s s e c t i o n s h a l l be inapp l i c a b l e t o any person i n any cause involving a d i r e c t contempt of c o u r t . "(b) I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e provision of subsection (a) any defendant may move a t any time f o r s u b s t i t u t i o n of judge f o r cause, supported by a f f i d a v i t . Upon t h e f i l i n g of such motion t h e c o u r t s h a l l conduct a hearing and determine t h e m e r i t s of t h e motion. I I "95-1710. Change of Place of T r i a l . "(a) The defendant o r t h e prosecution may move f o r a change of place of t r i a l on t h e ground t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s i n t h e county i n which t h e charge i s pending such p r e j u d i c e t h a t a f a i r t r i a l cannot be had i n such county. The motion s h a l l be made a t l e a s t f i f t e e n days p r i o r t o t r i a l , u n l e s s , f o r good cause shown, i t may be made t h e r e a f t e r . It (b) The motion s h a l l be i n w r i t i n g and supported by a f f i d a v i t which s h a l l s t a t e f a c t s showing t h e n a t u r e of t h e p r e j u d i c e a l l e g e d . The defendant o r t h e s t a t e may f i l e c o u n t e r - a f f i d a v i t s . The c o u r t s h a l l conduct a hearing and determine t h e merits of t h e motion. "(c) I f t h e c o u r t determines t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s i n t h e county where t h e prosecution i s pending such prej u d i c e t h a t a f a i r t r i a l cannot be had i t s h a l l t r a n s f e r t h e cause t o any o t h e r c o u r t of competent j u r i s d i c t i o n i n any county where a f a i r t r i a l may be had." From t h e context of t h e s e two s e c t i o n s i t i s c l e a r t h a t both s e c t i o n s r e f e r t o d i s t r i c t c o u r t a c t i o n s . However, t h e defendant Bailey argues t h a t s i n c e s e c t i o n 95-206, R.C.M. 1947, t h e c h a p t e r on d e f i n i t i o n s , d e f i n e s t h e term "judge" t o include j u s t i c e of t h e peace, then s e c t i o n 95-1709 using t h e word "judge" r a t h e r than " d i s t r i c t c o u r t judge", must include t h e r i g h t t o s u b s t i t u t i o n of j u s t i c e of t h e peace. Section 95-206, R.C.M. reads : "'.Judge1 means a person who i s invested by law with t h e power t o perform j u d i c i a l f u n c t i o n s and i n c l u d e s c o u r t , j u s t i c e of t h e peace o r p o l i c e magistrate when a p a r t i c u l a r context s o r e q u i r e- (Emphasis a d d e d ) . s. " 1947, Does t h e p a r t i c u l a r context of s e c t i o n 95-1709, R.C.M. 1947, requirre i t ? W t h i n k n o t . e Rather, w e f i n d t h a t t h e o v e r a l l context of t h e Code of Criminal Procedure r e q u i r e s t h a t s e c t i o n s 95-1709 and 95-1710 apply t o d i s t r i c t c o u r t s . A s we have h e r e t o f o r e shown, an adequate, speedy remedy a t law i s provided by t h e r i g h t t o a t r i a l de novo under s e c t i o n 95-2009, R.C.M. 1947. Thus a new judge i s had i n any event. Also, s i g n i f i c a n t l y t h e l e g i s l a t u r e has n o t provided f o r o t h e r j u s t i c e s Many c o u n t i e s and townships have of t h e peace t o be c a l l e d i n . only one j u s t i c e of t h e peace. N provision anywhere i n t h e Code o i s provided f o r procedures, expenses, record keeping o r otherwise f o r s u b s t i t u t i o n of j u s t i c e s of t h e peace. This alone strengthens t h e view t h a t t h e p a r t i c u l a r context of s e c t i o n 95-1709 does n o t r e q u i r e t h e word "judge" t o include j u s t i c e of t h e peace. Rather, i t r e q u i r e s t h a t i t n o t be included s i n c e o t h e r adequate and prompt methods f o r p r o t e c t i n g t h e r i g h t of a defendant t o j u s t i c e at.eprovided, a s h e r e t o f o r e explained. Accordingly, we hold t h a t a j u s t i c e of t h e peace may n o t be d i s q u a l i f i e d on a simple a f f i d a v i t f o r s u b s t i t u t i o n of judge under s e c t i o n 95-1709, R.C.M. Chapter 20, T i t l e 95, R.C.M. 1947, b u t r a t h e r t h e provisions of 1947, must be followed. W r e v e r s e t h e o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t appealed from e and remand t h e cause t o t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t f o r d i s m i s s a l of t h e complaint of Bailey and f o r remand t o t h e j u s t i c e c o u r t of B i l l i n g s Township f o r t r i a l of t h e complaint t h e r e i n pending.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.