10/31/2017
DA 16-0225
Case Number: DA 16-0225
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2017 MT 262N
RANDALL LOWELL STONE,
Petitioner and Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MONTANA,
Respondent and Appellee.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Sixth Judicial District,
In and For the County of Park, Cause No. DC 97-38
Honorable Brenda Gilbert, Presiding Judge
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
Randall L. Stone (Self-Represented), Glendive, Montana
For Appellee:
Timothy C. Fox, Montana Attorney General, C. Mark Fowler, Assistant
Attorney General, Helena, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: August 16, 2017
Decided: October 31, 2017
Filed:
__________________________________________
Clerk
Justice Michael E Wheat delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating
Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not
serve as precedent. 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.
¶2 Randall Lowell Stone (Stone) appeals from the February 9, 2017 order of the Sixth
Judicial District Court, Park County, denying his petition for post-conviction relief
(PCR). On April 25, 1997, Stone was charged with one count of burglary, two counts of
felony theft, and one count of endangering the welfare of a child. On June 23, 1997,
Stone pled guilty to all counts. On July 14, 1997, Stone was sentenced to a six-year
deferred sentence. Subsequently, in 1999, Stone’s sentence was revoked and he was
sentenced to five years for each felony to run concurrently.
¶3 On February 3, 2016, Stone filed his PCR petition, raising numerous ineffective
assistance of counsel claims. On February 9, 2016, the District Court denied Stone’s
petition based on the merits. Stone now appeals the District Court’s denial of his PCR
petition.
¶4 We review a district court’s denial of a petition for post-conviction relief to
determine whether the court’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous and whether its
conclusions of law are correct. Wilkes v. State, 2015 MT 243, ¶ 9, 380 Mont. 388, 355
P.3d 755. We will affirm a district court’s ruling, even if the court reached the correct
2
result for the wrong reason. Raugust v. State, 2003 MT 367, ¶ 9, 319 Mont. 97, 82 P.3d
890.
¶5 Section 46-21-102(1), MCA, provides that a PCR petition must be filed within one
year of the date that the conviction becomes final. A conviction becomes final when the
time for appeal to the Montana Supreme Court expires. Section 46-21-102(1)(a), MCA.
Under M. R. App. P. 4(5)(b)(i), an appeal from a judgment must be brought within sixty
days after entry of the judgment.
¶6 In this case, Stone’s sentence was imposed on July 14, 1997. Stone had sixty days
from this date to file an appeal to this Court. He did not appeal. His time for appeal
expired in September 1997, and his conviction was then final for purposes of
§ 46-21-102(1), MCA. Therefore, pursuant to the one-year limitation period, Stone had
until September 1998 to file his PCR petition. Thus, because Stone did not file his PCR
petition until February 2016, the petition is time-barred under § 46-21-102(1), MCA.
Stone failed to show that an exception to the PCR statute of limitations applies.
¶7 The District Court denied Stone’s PCR on the merits. The District Court did not
consider the PCR statute of limitations, however, reached the correct result. Therefore,
the District Court properly denied Stone’s PCR petition.
¶8 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of
our Internal Operating Rules, which provides for memorandum opinions. 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.
¶9 Affirmed.
3
/S/ MICHAEL E WHEAT
We Concur:
/S/ MIKE McGRATH
/S/ LAURIE McKINNON
/S/ BETH BAKER
/S/ JAMES JEREMIAH SHEA
4