07/20/2021
DA 20-0118
Case Number: DA 20-0118
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2021 MT 184N
STATE OF MONTANA,
Plaintiff and Appellee,
v.
TERENCE R. PASSMORE,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Sixth Judicial District,
In and For the County of Park, Cause No. DC 06-60
Honorable Brenda R. Gilbert, Presiding Judge
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
Terence R. Passmore, Self-represented, Deer Lodge, Montana
For Appellee:
Austin Knudsen, Montana Attorney General, C. Mark Fowler, Assistant
Attorney General, Helena, Montana
Kendra Lassiter, Park County Attorney, Livingston, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: June 30, 2021
Decided: July 20, 2021
Filed:
cir-641.—if
__________________________________________
Clerk
Justice Ingrid Gustafson delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶1 Defendant and Appellant Terence R. Passmore (Passmore) appeals from the Order
Denying Motion to Amend Judgment issued January 21, 2020, by the Sixth Judicial District
Court, Park County. On December 16, 2019, nearly 10 years after this Court affirmed his
conviction and over five years after this Court denied his first petition for postconviction
relief (PCR), Passmore filed a motion to amend judgment seeking to be relieved of
completing Phase 2 of his Sex Offender Treatment at the Montana State Prison—instead
seeking to complete this phase of treatment in the Missoula community. The District Court
held, pursuant to § 46-18-116(2) and (3), MCA, it had no authority to alter or amend a
criminal judgment as none of the statutory conditions permitting such—the judgment
conflicting with oral pronouncement with request made within 120 days of filing the
written judgment, the sentence being factually erroneous, postconviction relief having been
properly sought, or the court having been appropriately instructed by the appellate court—
existed. We agree with the District Court. Further, Passmore’s motion to amend is nothing
more than a successive PCR petition—styled as a motion—collaterally attacking his
sentence. His motion to amend his judgment is time-barred under § 46-21-102, MCA, by
several years. Finally, it is precluded by § 46-21-105, MCA, which prohibits PCR as to
issues raised, or which reasonably could have been raised, in prior proceedings. As noted
by the District Court, Passmore had opportunity to raise the claim he now asserts both on
appeal and in conjunction with his first PCR petition and failed to do so. We affirm.
2
¶2 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of our
Internal Operating Rules, which provides for memorandum opinions. It shall not be cited
and does not serve as precedent. In the opinion of the Court, the case presents a question
controlled by settled law or by the clear application of applicable standards of review. Its
case title, cause number, and disposition shall be included in this Court’s quarterly list of
noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana Reports.
/S/ INGRID GUSTAFSON
We concur:
/S/ MIKE McGRATH
/S/ JAMES JEREMIAH SHEA
/S/ DIRK M. SANDEFUR
/S/ JIM RICE
3