State v. Swazio

No. 13449

I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O F MONTANA
F

1977

THE STATE O F MONTANA,

P l a i n t i f f and Respondent,

-vs-

ANTHONY M A R T I N SWAZIO,

Defendant and A p p e l l a n t .

Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court 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 ,
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 A p p e l l a n t :

Moses, Kampfe, T o l l i v e r and W r i g h t , B i l l i n g s , Montana

For Respondent :

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
Dennis Moreen, 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
A r t h u r W. A y e r s , J r . County A t t o r n e y , a r g u e d , Red Lodge,
Montana

Submitted: A p r i l 1 4 , 1977

Decided : 2 6 1977
M r . J u s t i c e Gene B . Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court.

O June 27, 1974, an Information was f i l e d i n t h e d i s t r i c t
n

c o u r t , Carbon County, charging Anthony Martin Swazio w i t h

aggravated a s s a u l t . The v i c t i m of t h e a l l e g e d a s s a u l t was

Deputy S h e r i f f Robert P e t e r s . O A p r i l 21, 1976, d e f e n d a n t was
n

found g u i l t y by a j u r y v e r d i c t . Defendant was sentenced t o

t h e s t a t e p r i s o n a t Deer Lodge, Montana, f o r a p e r i o d of one

year. From t h i s v e r d i c t and f i n a l judgment defendant a p p e a l s .

On June 22, 1974, a t approximately 10:45 p.m., Swazio

was informed by h i s w i f e t h a t Deputy S h e r i f f Robert P e t e r s

had been t o t h e i r home d u r i n g t h e day looking f o r a S t e v e H u l l ,

a f r i e n d of Swazio. T h i s u p s e t defendant a s t h e r e e x i s t e d bad

blood between he and Deputy S h e r i f f P e t e r s . Swazio drove t o

t h e P e t e r s ' r e s i d e n c e w i t h a Bruce Brush. Brush accompanied

defendant t o show him where Deputy S h e r i f f P e t e r s l i v e d . Swazio

parked h i s c a r i n f r o n t of t h e P e t e r s ' r e s i d e n c e , t h e n walked

through a g a t e i n t h e fence e n c l o s i n g t h e house and y a r d , and

t o t h e door of t h e house, Brush remained i n s i d e d e f e n d a n t ' s

v e h i c l e t h e e n t i r e time. The w i f e of Deputy S h e r i f f P e t e r s ,

P h y l l i s P e t e r s , answered t h e door. Swazio reques tEd t h a t P e t e r s

come o u t of t h e house and speak w i t h him. Deputy S h e r i f f P e t e r s

came o u t s i d e and went through t h e g a t e of t h e fence and t h e r e

met defendant.

A t t h i s time an argument ensued between them r e g a r d i n g t h e
of
c o n d u c t / ~ e p u tS h e r i f f P e t e r s e a r l i e r t h a t day and b o t h were
~

y e l l i n g a t each o t h e r . Phyllis Peters, seeing the discussion

had e s c a l a t e d i n t o a v i o l e n t argument, came from t h e house w i t h

a gun and f i r e d it i n t o t h e a i r , a p p a r e n t l y i n an a t t e m p t t o s t o p
t h e argument. The f i r i n g o f t h e s h o t had no e f f e c t on defendant

o~ 3eputy P e t e r s .

A t t h i s time Depucy b h e r i f f P e t e r s took t h e gun from h i s

w i f e and informed defendant he was going t o p l a c e him under

a r r e s t f o r d i s t u r b i n g t h e peace. A t t h i s p o i n t t h e r e i s con-

f l i c t i n the facts. P e t e r s and h i s w i f e t e s t i f i e d t h a t a s

P e t e r s was about t o f r i s k d e f e n d a n t , defendant made a sudden

move t u r n i n g toward P e t e r s . The gun d i s c h a r g e d and defendant

was s h o t i n t h e back. P r i o r t o t h e s h o o t i n g Deputy P e t e r s and

h i s w i f e c l a i m defendant a s s a u l t e d Deputy S h e r i f f P e t e r s by

s t r i k i n g him w i t h h i s f i s t . Defendant t e s t i f i e d t h a t when

P e t e r s s a i d he was a r r e s t i n g him, he threw up h i s arms, t u r n e d ,

and walked away from P e t e r s toward h i s v e h i c l e . After taking

a few s t e p s he was s h o t i n t h e back. Defendant claimed he n e v e r
he
s t r u c k Deputy P e t e r s , u n t i l a f t e r / Nas s h o t i n t h e back.

As a r e s u l t of t h e s h o o t i n g defendant f i l e d a c i v i l c l a i m

a g a i n s t t h e s t a t e of Montana. Defendant's a t t o r n e y moved t o

have any evidence of t h e c i v i l c l a i m excluded from t r i a l . The

motion i n l i m i n e was denied. Brush, d e f e n d a n t ' s companion, gave

a s t a t e m e n t t o Deputy S h e r i f f P e t e r s soon a f t e r t h e i n c i d e n t .

Brush could n o t be found t o be served w i t h a subpoena t o appear

a t t r i a l s o d e f e n d a n t ' s a t t o r n e y attempted t o i n t r o d u c e t h e

s t a t e m e n t g i v e n t o t h e deputy s h e r i f f i n t o evidence. The t r i a l

c o u r t d i s a n m e d t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e s t a t e m e n t a t t r i a l .

O a p p e a l defendant p r e s e n t s t h r e e i s s u e s f o r review by t h i s
n

Court;

1. Whether t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d i n denying d e f e n d a n t ' s

motion i n l i m i n e , t h e r e b y allowing evidence t o be p r e s e n t e d t o

t h e j u r y r e g a r d i n g d e f e n d a n t ' s c i v i l c l a i m a g a i n s t t h e s t a t e of

.