08/16/2022
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: DA 22-0341
DA 22-0341
STATE OF MONTANA, AUG 1 6 2022
Bowen Greenwocd
Clerk of Supr me Court
Plaintiff and Appellee, State of Montana
v. ORDER
RICHARD WAYNE SPARKS,
Defendant and Appellant.
Self-represented Appellant Richard Wayne Sparks has pending an appeal in his
postconviction proceeding. Sparks filed, on July 25, 2022, four motions for various relief:
"Motion Requesting Appointment of Counsel;" "Motion for Release from Custody;"
"Motion Requesting [Joinder] of Claims;" and "Request for the Mandated and Entitled
`Frank's' Evidentiary Hearing." The State of Montana has not filed a response.
On July 13, 2022, this Court granted Sparks's Petition for an Out-of-Time Appeal
of a March 4, 2022 Order denying his postconviction motions, not the July 21, 2021
Judgment and Commitment. We explained this difference.
Upon review, we conclude that Sparks is entitled to an appeal but that he is
not entitled to appointment of counsel to represent him. Section 46-8-104(3),
MCA. On March 4, 2022, the District Court denied his motions in a written
order, and about two months later, the court denied Sparks's motion for
reconsideration. Sparks appeals the court's order deciding his postconviction
motions, not the July 21, 2021 Judgment and Commitment. There is no right
to the appointment of counsel in a postconviction proceeding for relief,
although a court may order the assignment of counsel under the
circumstances outlined in § 46-8-104, MCA. Instead of seeking a timely
appeal with this Court, he sought relief in the District Court as a self-
represented litigant. His delay in seeking a timely appeal is due to the
motions he filed in District Court in lieu of seeking a direct appeal of his
convictions and sentences.
Upon further review, we conclude Sparks is not entitled to any relief. This Court has
explained the denial of Sparks's initial request for counsel and what order he may appeal.
Sparks is not entitled to representation of counsel on appeal in his postconviction matter,
to joinder or consolidation of his appeals, to release, or to an evidentiary hearing. This
Court does not hold fact-finding hearings because that is the role of the trial court.
Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that Sparks's above-listed Motions are DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Supreme Court shall REMOVE
Sparks's copy of the July 2021 Judgment and Commitment from his filed Notice of Appeal
to comport with this Court's July 13, 2022 Order. Upon receipt of the District Court record,
the Clerk will REPLACE the order on appeal with a copy of the March 4, 2022 Order.
The Clerk is also directed to provide a copy of this Order to counsel of record and
to Richard Wayne Sparks personally.
DATED this k IQ, day of August, 2022.
2