No. 80-374
I N THE SUPREJE COURT O THE STATE O MONTANA
F F
1981
STATE O MONTANA,
F
P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t ,
LONNIE LINK,
Defendant and Respondent.
Appeal from: D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e E i g h t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t ,
I n and f o r t h e County o f Cascade.
Honorable H. W i l l i a m Coder, J u d g e p r e s i d i n g .
Counsel o f Record:
For A p p e l l a n t :
Hon. Mike G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , Helena, Montana
C h r i s Tweeten a r g u e d , A s s i s t a n t A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ,
H e l e n a , Montana
J. F r e d Bourdeau, County A t t o r n e y , G r e a t F a l l s , Montana
C a r r o l l Blend a r g u e d , Deputy County A t t o r n e y , G r e a t
F a l l s , Montana
F o r Respondent:
Michael S m a r t t a r g u e d , P u b l i c D e f e n d e r , Great F a l l s ,
Montana
Submitted: J u n e 8 , 1981
Decided :
3UN 2 3 1981
Filed: JJFI 2 3 1981
M r . Chief J u s t i c e Frank I . Haswell d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n of t h e
Court.
The S t a t e a p p e a l s from a n o r d e r e n t e r e d i n D i s t r i c t C o u r t ,
Cascade County, g r a n t i n g d e f e n d a n t ' s motion f o r a change of
venue. W reverse.
e
D e f e n d a n t was a r r e s t e d F e b r u a r y 25, 1980, i n G r e a t F a l l s ,
Montana, and was c h a r g e d w i t h f e l o n y t h e f t . H e pleaded not
g u i l t y and was r e l e a s e d on h i s own r e c o g n i z a n c e . T r i a l was s e t
f o r J u n e 3 0 , b u t was v a c a t e d and r e s e t f o r August 25, 1980. On
August 11, 1980, d e f e n d a n t was a r r e s t e d f o r r o b b e r y . Both crimes
were reported i n t h e Great F a l l s Tribune. One a r t i c l e , p u b l i s h e d
1 2 d a y s b e f o r e t r i a l , p i c t u r e d d e f e n d a n t i n h a n d c u f f s , and i n a n
a r t i c l e a p p e a r i n g a week b e f o r e t r i a l , s e v e r a l community bus i-
nessmen were r e p o r t e d a s b e i n g c r i t i c a l of t h e p r e s i d i n g d i s t r i c t
j u d g e f o r h a v i n g r e l e a s e d d e f e n d a n t on h i s m n r e c o g n i z a n c e . The
r e m a i n i n g a r t i c l e s were r o u t i n e news r e l e a s e s c o n c e r n i n g t h e
c r i m e s a l l e g e d l y committed by d e f e n d a n t .
On August 25, t h e day of t r i a l , d e f e n d a n t f i l e d a m o t i o n
and a f f i d a v i t w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t r e q u e s t i n g e i t h e r a change
o f venue, o r t h e postponement of t h e t r i a l t o a l l o w t i m e f o r t h e
p u b l i c i t y t o d i e down. F o l l o w i n g h e a r i n g , t h e d i s t r i c t judge
g r a n t e d d e f e n d a n t ' s motion f o r a change of venue. The S t a t e
appeals.
The p a r t i e s r a i s e d s e v e r a l i s s u e s which w e frame a s f o l l o w s :
1) Did t h e d i s t r i c t judge a b u s e h i s d i s c r e t i o n i n g r a n t i n g
t h e change of venue?
2 ) Should t h i s Court r e c o n s i d e r t h e s t a n d a r d used t o
d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a change of venue s h o u l d be g r a n t e d ?
The S t a t e c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t judge abused h i s
d i s c r e t i o n i n g r a n t i n g t h e change of venue, b e c a u s e t h e r e was n o t
a showing of e x i s t i n g p r e j u d i c e i n t h e community. A mere showing
o f p u b l i c a t i o n d o e s n o t p r o v e t h a t p r e j u d i c e r e s u l t s , which w i l l
bias the t r i a l . D e f e n d a n t a r g u e s t h a t t h e S t a t e h a s a heavy bur-
"The c a s e s i n Montana h a v e e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t
b e f o r e a d i s t r i c t judge can e x e r c i s e h i s d i s c r e -
t i o n i n g r a n t i n g a c h a n g e o f v e n u e t h e r e m u s t be
more t h a n (1) a f f i a n t w s u n s u p p o r t e d o p i n i o n , ( 2 )
t h e f a c t t h a t t h e a c c o u n t o f a crime h a s b e e n
p u b l i s h e d , t h a t s a i d published a c c o u n t s of t h e
crime are n o t p r e j u d i c i a l u n l e s s t h e y a r e
p a s s i o n a t e e n o u g h t o e x c i t e undue p r e j u d i c e , t o
- e e d e -o-h a v ree n djeur ri n g f r e e i mrp o s spi rbel jeu d iocre .t" e -
the xt nt of
accus t - a y --
it
f om
--
f h
S t a t e e x r e l . H a n r a h a n v. D i s t r i c t C o u r t ,
( 1 9 6 5 ) , 1 4 5 Mont. 501, 508, 4 0 1 P.2d 7 7 0 , 774.
S e e a l s o S t a t e v. C o r l i s s ( 1 9 6 7 ) , 1 5 0 Mont. 40, 430 P.2d 632;
S t a t e v. S a n d s t r o m ( 1 9 7 8 ) , Mont. , 580 P.2d 106, 3 5
St.Rep. 744.
What is r e q u i r e d by Montana case l a w , t h e n , i s more t h a n
a n a l l e g a t i o n of p u b l i c i t y ; t h e c o u r t must d e t e r m i n e t h a t t h e
p u b l i c i t y h a s s o a f f e c t e d t h e community and h a s so a r o u s e d p r e j u -
d i c e i n t h e community t h a t a f a i r t r i a l c a n n o t be h a d .
Here, t h e r e was no a t t e m p t t o assess t h e e f f e c t o f t h e
publicity. A l t h o u g h t h e j u r y was r e a d y f o r t r i a l , t h e c h a n g e o f
v e n u e was g r a n t e d w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n i n g t h e p r o s p e c t i v e j u r o r s a s
t o t h e i r k n o w l e d g e o f t h e case, w h e t h e r t h e y had s e e n t h e
p u b l i c i t y , or as t o t h e e f f e c t o n them o f t h e p u b l i c i t y . The
d e c i s i o n t o c h a n g e v e n u e r e s u l t e d f r o m a f i n d i n g of p r e j u d i c e p e r
se a r i s i n g o n l y f r o m p u b l i c a t i o n . T h i s is n o t t h e l a w i n
Montana. W i t h no f i n d i n g o f e x i s t i n g p r e j u d i c e , t h e d i s t r i c t
judge abused h i s d i s c r e t i o n i n o r d e r i n g t h e change. T h e r e f o r e we
r e v e r s e t h e o r d e r and remand t h e c a u s e f o r t r i a l i n C a s c a d e
County.
The d e f e n d a n t i n t h i s case a d m i t t e d t h a t t h e r e was n o
showing of e x i s t i n g p r e j u d i c e . H e acknowledged t h a t no o n e
a r t i c l e w a s p a s s i o n a t e e n o u g h t o a r o u s e t h e p r e j u d i c e of t h e
community, b u t h e u r g e d t h e c o u r t t o v i e w t h e c u m u l a t i v e e f f e c t
o f a l l of t h e articles published. He argued t h a t t h e s t a n d a r d
u s e d i n Montana f o r g r a n t i n g a c h a n g e o f v e n u e i s too r i g i d to b e
w o r k a b l e , and u r g e s t h i s C o u r t t o a d o p t t h e ABA s t a n d a r d on
change of venue o r c o n t i n u a n c e . Montana l a w now r e q u i r e s a
d e n t o show a b u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n by t h e j u d g e . He c o n t e n d s t h a t
t h e a r t i c l e s p u b l i s h e d and t h e i n f o r m a t i o n which t h e . j u d g e was
aware o f were s u f f i c i e n t to a l l o w him t o make a d e t e r m i n a t i o n
t h a t defendant could not g e t a f a i r t r i a l .
The s t a t u t e a u t h o r i z i n g a c h a n g e o f v e n u e r e q u i r e s a showing
of existing prejudice:
"Change o f p l a c e o f t r i a l . (1) The d e f e n d a n t or
t h e p r o s e c u t i o n m a y move f o r a c h a n g e o f p l a c e
of t r i a l o n t h e g r o u n d t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s - -e
in th
c o u n t y i n w h i c h t h e c h a r g e i s p e n d i n g -- -
such pre
i u d i c e - - - a f a i r t r i a l cannot - - i n s u c h
a
that b e had
c o u n t y . The m o t i o n m u s t be made a t l e a s t 1 5
d a y s p r i o r t o t r i a l e x c e p t t h a t , i f good c a u s e
i s shown, it may be made t h e r e a f t e r .
" ( 2 ) The m o t i o n m u s t be i n w r i t i n g and sup-
p o r t e d by a n a f f i d a v i t which m u s t 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 d e f e n d a n t o r t h e s t a t e may f i l e c o u n t e r -
affidavits. The c o u r t s h a l l c o n d u c t a h e a r i n g
a n d d e t e r m i n e t h e merits o f t h e m o t i o n .
" ( 3 ) I f the court determines t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s
- -e c o u n t y i n w h i c h t h e p r o s e c u t i o n is
in th
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
b e h a d , it s h a l l t r a n s f e r t h e c a u s e t o a n y 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 i n
w h i c h a f a i r t r i a l may be had." ( E m p h a s i s a d d e d . )
S e c t i o n 46-13-203, MCA.
The f i n d i n g s o f t h e d i s t r i c t j u d g e d o n o t i n d i c a t e t h a t h e
found e x i s t i n g p r e j u d i c e . R a t h e r , h e found t h a t " t h e p u b l i c i t y
i n c i d e n t t o t h e s e p a r t i c u l a r cases, w i t h o u t more, is s u f f i c i e n t
t o w a r r a n t a change of venue." N o t i n g t h a t t w o c h a r g e s were
p e n d i n g a g i n s t t h e d e f e n d a n t i n Cascade County a t t h i s t i m e , t h e
d i s t r i c t j u d g e d e t e r m i n e d t h a t j u d i c i a l t i m e and economy would be
b e s t served by o r d e r i n g a change of venue.
T h i s Court h a s i n d i c a t e d t h a t where t h e e v i d e n c e is
i n c o n c l u s i v e on t h e i s s u e of p r e j u d i c e , t h e d i s t r i c t j u d g e ' s
d i s c r e t i o n s h o u l d be r e l i e d o n . H i s r u l i n g s h o u l d n o t be
d i s t u r b e d u n l e s s a n a b u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n is shown. S t a t e v.
Bashor ( 1 9 8 0 ) , Mont. , 614 P.2d 470, 476, 37 S t . R e p . 1098,
1100. Under t h e f a c t s o f t h i s c a s e w e f i n d a n a b u s e o f
discretion.
T h i s C o u r t h a s d i s c u s s e d t h e showing t h a t m u s t be made
b e f o r e a c h a n g e o f v e n u e is g r a n t e d :
showing of e x i s t i n g p r e j u d i c e s u b s t a n t i a l enough t o make a f a i r
t r i a l i m p o s s i b l e , w h i l e t h e ABA s t a n d a r d r e q u i r e s o n l y a showing
o f a " r e a s o n a b l e l i k e l i h o o d " t h a t a f a i r t r i a l c a n n o t be h a d , and
i t d o e s n o t r e q u i r e any showing of a c t u a l p r e j u d i c e .
W a g r e e t h a t t h e " i m p o s s i b l e t o have a f a i r t r i a l " s t a n -
e
d a r d is an unworkable o n e . I t is u n l i k e l y t h a t e x c e p t i n t h e
most e x t r e m e c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t c o u l d show t h a t it
i s i m p o s s i b l e t o o b t a i n a j u r y f r e e from p r e j u d i c e . But, r a t h e r
t h a n a d o p t i n g t h e ABA s t a n d a r d , a s we a r e urged t o do by
d e f e n d a n t , w e w i l l h e r e a f t e r a p p l y t h e r u l e a s s e t o u t by t h e
I l l i n o i s Supreme C o u r t , i n i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e I l l i n o i s venue
s t a t u t e , on which o u r s t a t u t e i s p a t t e r n e d :
'I [TI he r u l e i s t h a t an accused is e n t i t l e d t o a
c h a n g e of venue when i t a p p e a r s t h e r e a r e r e a s o -
n a b l e g r o u n d s to b e l i e v e t h a t t h e p r e j u d i c e
a l l e g e d a c t u a l l y e x i s t s and t h a t by r e a s o n of
t h e p r e j u d i c e t h e r e is a r e a s o n a b l e a p p r e h e n s i o n
t h a t t h e accused c a n n o t r e c e i v e a f a i r and
impartial t r i a l . P e o p l e v. B e r r y ( 1 9 6 7 ) , 37
I11.2d 329, 226 N . E . 2 d 591, 592-593.
S e e a l s o , P e o p l e v. Campbell ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 28 Ill.App.3d 480, 328
By a d o p t i n g t h e I l l i n o i s s t a n d a r d , we a r e n o t s u g g e s t i n g
t h a t a showing of e x i s t i n g p r e j u d i c e need no l o n g e r be made.
B e f o r e a d i s t r i c t judge c a n f i n d " r e a s o n a b l e g r o u n d s t o b e l i e v e
t h a t t h e p r e j u d i c e a l l e g e d a c t u a l l y e x i s t s " , something beyond
b a r e a l l e g a t i o n is r e q u i r e d t o prove t h a t t h e community i s
a c t u a l l y infected with prejudice . However, by h o l d i n g t h a t t h e
d e f e n d a n t no l o n g e r h a s t o show t h a t it is " i m p o s s i b l e " t o f i n d
a n u n p r e j u d i c e d j u r y i n t h e community, w e a r e a l l o w i n g a d i s t r i c t
judge t o e x e r c i s e h i s d i s c r e t i o n i n determining t h a t t h e a c t u a l
p r e j u d i c e is s u f f i c i e n t l y p e r v a s i v e to w a r r a n t a change of venue.
Although we a r e a d o p t i n g t h i s r u l e p r o s p e c t i v e l y , it i s
u n l i k e l y t h a t d e f e n d a n t would have p r e v a i l e d under t h e new
standard. A s w e noted above, no a c t u a l e x i s t i n g p r e j u d i c e was
a l l e g e d o r proved which is f a t a l under e i t h e r s t a n d a r d .
The o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t judge is r e v e r s e d , and we remand
t h e cause t o Cascade County f o r t r i a l on the m e r i t s .
Chief J u s t i c e
W con
e :
--