State Ex Rel Forsythe v. Coate

No. 13442 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O MONTANA F F 1976 STATE ex r e l . JOHN S. FORSYTHE, Relator, DISTRICT JUDGE ALFRED B. COATE, Judge o f t h e S i x t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , County o f Rosebud, Respondent. ORIGINAL PR-OCEEDING: Counsel o f Record: For Relator : Eugene LaLonde a r g u e d , B i l l i n g s , Montana Lee O v e r f e l t , B i l l i n g s , Montana Submitted: J u l y 7 , 1976 Decided: j t i i 1- 1$?8 2 ' i - Mr. Justice Wesley Castles delivered the Opinion of the Court. This is an application for a writ of supervisory control ordering the reinstatement of relator, John S. Forsythe, as county attorney of Rosebud County. Following the return of an indictment from the Rosebud County grand jury accusing relator of official mis- conduct, he was suspended from his office without pay by order of the district court dated May 19, 1976. The indictment charged relator violated his duty to diligently prosecute public offenses by dismissing charges against four persons who were accused of parti- cipating in an illegal card game. On or about October 19, 1975, sheriff's deputies investigating alleged illegal gambling activities entered Buff's Bar in Forsyth, Montana. Upon observing a game of blackjack in progress, they arrested the bar's owner, the card dealer, and four customers who were playing in the game. The cases were originally set for arraignment on November 17, 1975, and later reset to November 26, 1975. On that date relator filed a motion to dismiss the cases against the four customers: Clyde V. Thompson; Marjorie R. Dobson; Lester P. Leischner; and Joe D. Opp. Arraignment for all six defendants was continued to December 11, 1975. On December 4, 1975, relator filed an Information against the owner and the dealer charging them with illegal gambling. An affidavit was filed in support of the Information naming the four customers as witnesses and indicating that they had participated in the game. A t t h e h e a r i n g o f December 11, 1975, t h e owner e n t e r e d a p l e a o f " g u i l t y " t o Count I of t h e Information charging him w i t h conducting an unauthorized c a r d game. He e n t e r e d a p l e a of "not g u i l t y " t o Count I1 of t h e Information c h a r g i n g him w i t h c h e a t i n g . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t i n q u i r e d i n t o t h e b a s i s of t h e g u i l t y p l e a and t h e owner r e p o r t e d t h e e v e n t s a t t h e time of t h e a r r e s t s a s he remem- bered them. The d i s t r i c t c o u r t found t h a t t h e f a c t s s u s t a i n e d t h e charge and accepted t h e g u i l t y p l e a . R e l a t o r t h e n moved t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i s m i s s w i t h o u t p r e j u d i c e Count I1 of t h e I n f o r m a t i o n f o r l a c k of evidence. The d i s t r i c t c o u r t g r a n t e d t h e motion. After argument by t h e owner's c o u n s e l , t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t sentenced t h e owner t o pay a f i n e of $200. The d e a l e r , who was n o t p r e s e n t a t t h e h e a r i n g o f December 11, 1975, e n t e r e d a g u i l t y p l e a i n A p r i l 1976 t o t h e charge of i l l e g a l gambling and was a l s o f i n e d $200. A f t e r t h e owner was s e n t e n c e d , t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t heard and g r a n t e d an o r a l motion by r e l a t o r t o d i s m i s s t h e charges a g a i n s t t h e four customers. The r e l e v a n t p o r t i o n of t h e t r a n s c r i p t of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t proceedings s t a t e s : "THE COURT: And i n c r i m i n a l cause 1116, 1 1 1 7 , 1119, and 1120, t h o s e being S t a t e of Montana v s . Clyde Thompson ---1116, S t a t e of Montana v s . M a r j o r i e R. Dobson---1117, S t a t e of Montana v s . L e s t e r P. Leischner --- 1119, and 1120---State of Montana v s . Joe D . Opp. "The County Attorney has f i l e d a w r i t t e n motion t o d i s m i s s i n each of them. Do you d e s i r e t o make an o r a l motion a t t h i s time? "MR. FORSYTHE: Yes, Your Honor. Comes now t h e County A t t o r n e y f o r Rosebud County and moves t h e Court t o d i s m i s s Criminal Cause Nos. 116,117,119, and 120*(sic) f o r t h e reason t h a t t h e r e i s an i n s u f f i c i e n t evidence t o s u p p o r t a p r o s e c u t i o n i n each of t h e s e c a s e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o Count 11. I a c e r t a i n t h a t t h e s e people were m unaware t h a t t h e r e was any c h e a t i n g going on i n t h e game o r t h e y would n o t have p a r t i c i p a t e d i n t h e game. "THE COURT: They were customers i n t h e game? "MR. FORSYTHE: Yes, Your Honor. "THE COURT: Very w e l l , t h e motion w i l l be g r a n t e d and those cases a r e dismissed. * * *" I t i s c l e a r from an examination of t h e proceedings a s s e t f o r t h above, t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t was f u l l y aware of t h e f a c t s and circumstances surrounding t h e motion t o d i s m i s s when i t was p r e s e n t e d . I n ordering t h e suspension, t h e d i s t r i c t court evidently f e l t bound by s e c t i o n 94-8-414, R.C.M. 1947: 11 Every county a t t o r n e y , s h e r i f f , c o n s t a b l e , c h i e f of ~olice, marshal, o r p o l i c e o f f i c e r must iniorm a g a i n s t and make complaint and d i l i g e n t l y p r o s e c u t e persons whom t h e y know, o r concerning whom t h e y may be informed, o r whom t h e y may have r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t o b e l i e v e t o be o f f e n d e r s a g a i n s t t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h i s a c t . The n e g l e c t o r r e f u s a l of any such o f f i c e r t o make complaint a g a i n s t o r d i l i g e n t l y p r o s e c u t e persons h e has r e a s o n a b l e c a u s e t o b e l i e v e t o be o f f e n d e r s a g a i n s t t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h i s a c t s h a l l be deemed s u f f i c i e n t cause f o r removal from o f f i c e . I ' (Emphasis s u p p l i e d .) This s t a t u t e c r e a t e s a presumption t h a t f a i l u r e t o f o l l o w t h e p r e s c r i b e d conduct c o n s t i t u t e s s u f f i c i e n t grounds f o r suspension from office. However, t h i s presumption i s n o t i r r e b u t t a b l e o r mandatory upon t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t . The d i s t r i c t c o u r t ' s own r e c o r d s show t h a t i t g r a n t e d r e l a t o r ' s motion t o d i s m i s s t h e c h a r g e s . When a motion t o d i s m i s s c r i m i n a l charges i s made by t h e county a t t o r n e y and approved by t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , t h e stamp of j u d i c i a l approval overcomes t h e s t a t u t o r y presumption l e a v i n g no room f o r d i s c r e t i o n . Suspension, ab- s e n t any i n d i c a t i o n of d e c e p t i o n o r f r a u d upon t h e c o u r t , i s inappro- priate. W a l s o n o t e t h a t s e c t i o n 94-7-401, R.C.M. e 1947, " O f f i c i a l isc conduct", under s u b s e c t i o n s ( l ) ( a ) and ( 4 ) , p r o v i d e s f o r a d i s - c r e t i o n a r y suspension. Here, a g a i n t h e C o u r t ' s own r e c o r d s show j u d i c i a l approval of t h e p r o s e c u t o r ' s a c t i o n s . T h e r e f o r e , i t i s o r d e r e d t h a t r e l a t o r , John S. F o r s y t h e , s h a l l r e c e i v e a l l back pay t o May 19, 1976, and be r e i n s t a t e d i n h i s o f f i c e pending f i n a l d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t h e charges a g a i n s t him. - L Justices.