No. 13509
I N THE SUPREME COURT O F THE S T A T E O F MONTANA
1 9 76
T h e S t a t e of M o n t a n a on t h e
R e l a t i o n of CHARLES F. ANGEL,
Relator,
VS.
ROBERT L . WOODAHL,
Respondent.
O R I G I N A L PROCEEDING:
C o u n s e l of R e c o r d :
For R e l a t o r :
C h a r l e s F. A n g e l a r g u e d , B o z e m a n , M o n t a n a
For R e s p o n d e n t :
H o n . R o b e r t L . W o o d a h l appeared, A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l ,
Helena, Montana
R o b e r t A. Poore a r g u e d , B u t t e , M o n t a n a
J a m e s H. M o r r o w argued and E d m u n d P . Sedivy a r g u e d ,
Bozeman, Montana
Submitted: O c t o b e r 8, 1 9 7 6
( -
i .,,i i ' , I f)\:
.." . , 8, " ,
i ! -3
Filed:
erk
PER CURIAM:
This i s an o r i g i n a l proceeding a g a i n s t t h e Attorney
G e n e r a l o f Montana f o r contempt o f c o u r t by r e a s o n of h i s
a l l e g e d v i o l a t i o n of a n o r d e r of t h i s C o u r t p r o h i b i t i n g " * * *
a l l public out-of-court s t a t e m e n t s t h a t may c o n c e i v a b l y i n f l u e n c e
p u b l i c o p i n i o n f o r o r a g a i n s t any p e r s o n o r i s s u e * * *" in
pending c r i m i n a l p r o s e c u t i o n s i n v o l v i n g workmen's compensation
matters.
The background o f t h e p r e s e n t p r o c e e d i n g i n d i c a t e s t h a t
f o r some t i m e p r i o r t o J u n e 11, 1976, many c h a r g e s and c o u n t e r -
c h a r g e s by t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l ' s s p e c i a l p r o s e c u t o r s on t h e
o n e hand and v a r i o u s d e f e n s e a t t o r n e y s on t h e o t h e r r e l a t i n g t o
pending c r i m i n a l p r o s e c u t i o n s i n v o l v i n g workmen's compensation
m a t t e r s were b e i n g w i d e l y d i s s e m i n a t e d t h r o u g h o u t Montana by
means of o u t - o f - c o u r t s t a t e m e n t s t o t h e d e t r i m e n t of f a i r and
j u s t l e g a l p r o c e e d i n g s t h e r e i n and t h a t s u c h a c t i o n s were r a p i d l y
approaching a c r i s i s .
On J u n e 11, 1976, t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l c a l l e d a p r e s s
c o n f e r e n c e i n which he c h a r g e d t h r e e named d i s t r i c t judges i n
pending c a s e s w i t h v o l u n t a r y a c t i o n s r e s u l t i n g i n " s u b s t a n t i a l
d e l a y s " i n b r i n g i n g t h e d e f e n d a n t s t o t r i a l and t h a t t h e workmen's
compensation i n v e s t i g a t i o n and p r o s e c u t i o n " i s one of t h e s a d
c h a p t e r s i n Montana h i s t o r y a n d , i f n o t t u r n e d a r o u n d , i s g o i n g
t o be a s a d c h a p t e r i n t h e h i s t o r y of t h e j u d i c i a r y " b e c a u s e of
d i l a t o r y a c t i o n s by l a w y e r s f o r t h e d e f e n d a n t s and t h e l a c k o f
f i r m n e s s by many of t h e judges. A t t h i s p r e s s c o n f e r e n c e one
o f t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l ' s s p e c i a l p r o s e c u t o r s announced t h a t h e
was r e s i g n i n g because o f " s u b s t a n t i a l d e l a y s " r e s u l t i n g i n h i s
p r o s e c u t i n g o n l y o n e c a s e i n 1 0 months and c h a r g i n g t h e r e was
a l m o s t "an i n c e s t u o u s r e l a t i o n s h i p " between a s m a l l number o f
judges and some l a w y e r s .
A t s a i d p r e s s c o n f e r e n c e t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l c a l l e d upon
t h i s C o u r t " t o t a k e h o l d of t h e m a t t e r " by c a l l i n g i n t h e j u d g e s ,
d e f e n s e l a w y e r s and p r o s e c u t o r s and making i t c l e a r t o them
" t h a t t h e y s h o u l d g e t on w i t h t h e b u s i n e s s of t h e day which i s
t o g e t these cases t o t r i a l . "
That i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l ' s c o m p l a i n t s
and r e q u e s t and i n view of t h e r a p i d l y d e t e r i o r a t i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p
between t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l and h i s p r o s e c u t o r s on one s i d e ,
d e f e n d a n t s and d e f e n s e c o u n s e l on a n o t h e r s i d e , w i t h a number of
t r i a l judges i n t h e m i d d l e , t h i s C o u r t c a l l e d a c o n f e r e n c e of
p r o s e c u t o r s , d e f e n s e c o u n s e l , and p r e s i d i n g judges by i t s o r d e r
of J u n e 1 4 , 1976, and p r o v i d e d , among o t h e r t h i n g s :
"That i n o r d e r t o prevent f u r t h e r i n j u r y t o t h e
r i g h t s of t h e p u b l i c , t h e s t a t e , t h e d e f e n d a n t s
and t h e j u d i c i a r y pending t h e c o n f e r e n c e h e r e i n
provided, a l l counsel, t h e i r s t a f f s , c l e r k s ,
s t e n o g r a p h e r s and a t t a c h e s a r e o r d e r e d and d i r e c t -
ed t o r e f r a i n d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y from p u b l i c
comment i n any way r e l a t i n g t o t h e l i t i g a t i o n
heretofore described."
and
"Any v i o l a t i o n of t h i s o r d e r s h a l l s u b j e c t t h e
o f f e n d e r t o p r o c e e d i n g s f o r contempt o f c o u r t . "
The c o n f e r e n c e was h e l d i n t h e courtroom of t h i s C o u r t on J u n e
21, 1976. The a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l and members of h i s s t a f f were
p r e s e n t and p a r t i c i p a t e d . A t s a i d c o n f e r e n c e , among o t h e r t h i n g s ,
t h i s C o u r t , t h r o u g h t h e Chief J u s t i c e , e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d :
" F i n a l l y , t h e o b j e c t i v e s t h a t we a r e p r e p a r e d t o
i n s i s t upon c a n be s t a t e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g c h a r g e
t o e a c h of you. F i r s t , accord t h i s l i t i g a t i o n i t s
r i g h t f u l paramount p r i o r i t y . Second, b r i n g t h e s e
c a s e s t o t r i a l with a l l d e l i b e r a t e speed. Third,
c e a s e and d e s i s t from a l l p u b l i c o u t - o f - c o u r t
s t a t e m e n t s t h a t may c o n c e i v a b l y i n f l u e n c e p u b l i c
o p i n i o n f o r o r a g a i n s t any p e r s o n o r i s s u e r e l a t -
i n g t o t h i s pending l i t i g a t i o n . F o u r t h , e a c h of
you w i l l be h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e f o r your own c o n d u c t
i n accomplishing t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s . * * * "
O August 1 2 , 1976, a t a m e e t i n g of t h e Kiwanis Club i n
n
S i d n e y , Montana, t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l , a c a n d i d a t e f o r g o v e r n o r ,
spoke f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 10 m i n u t e s a t which t i m e he made no
remarks c o n c e r n i n g t h e workmen's compensation c r i m i n a l p r o s e -
cutions. T h a t t h e r e a f t e r c e r t a i n q u e s t i o n s from t h e a u d i e n c e
were d i r e c t e d t o him r e g a r d i n g t h e workmen's compensation
litigation. T h a t t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l asked i f t h e r e w e r e any
members o f t h e p r e s s p r e s e n t and t h e n proceeded t o p u b l i c l y
blame t h r e e o t h e r d i s t r i c t judges from t h o s e named a t h i s p r e s s
c o n f e r e n c e o f J u n e 1 f o r some of t h e p r o s e c u t i o n ' s d i f f i c u l t i e s ;
1
t h a t a l l t h r e e judges w e r e a p p o i n t e d by former Governor F o r r e s t
Anderson; i m p l i e d t h a t t h e s e judges were l o o k i n g o u t f o r t h e
i n t e r e s t s of t h e former d e m o c r a t i c g o v e r n o r and h i s f r i e n d s ;
and went on t o t e l l how he was t r y i n g t o g e t t h e c a s e s t r i e d
q u i c k l y b u t t h e t h r e e judges and t h e l a w y e r s r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e
d e f e n d a n t s had been f i l i n g numerous unwarranted m o t i o n s and
dragging t h e i r f e e t t o s t a l l t h e t r i a l s p a s t e l e c t i o n t i m e . The
a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l i n d i c a t e d t h a t he r e a l i z e d he was making t h e
t y p e o f comments t h a t a r e frowned upon by t h e Supreme C o u r t and
mentioned t h i s C o u r t ' s o r d e r a g a i n s t p u b l i c comment on t h e cases.
A f t e r t h i s m a t t e r came t o t h e a t t e n t i o n of t h i s C o u r t ,
we i s s u e d a n o r d e r and c i t a t i o n t o t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l t o a p p e a r
and show c a u s e why contempt p r o c e e d i n g s s h o u l d n o t be i n s t i t u t e d
a g a i n s t him. The a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l a p p e a r e d , a d m i t t e d t h e sub-
s t a n c e o f e v e n t s and s t a t e m e n t s g i v i n g r i s e t o o u r o r d e r and
c i t a t i o n , b u t d e n i e d t h a t t h e y were i n t e n d e d t o o r d i d c o n s t i t u t e
contempt. Following h e a r i n g , t h i s C o u r t by o r d e r of September 7 ,
1976, d i r e c t e d t h a t contempt p r o c e e d i n g s be i n s t i t u t e d a g a i n s t
t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l and d e s i g n a t e d a t t o r n e y C h a r l e s F. Angel t o
i n s t i t u t e such proceedings.
On September 2 8 , 1976, contempt p r o c e e d i n g s w e r e i n s t i -
t u t e d by t h e f i l i n g o f a n a f f i d a v i t f o r contempt by M r . Angel.
The a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l responded on October 7 , by f i l i n g a motion
t o quash and d i s m i s s t h e p r o c e e d i n g and a n answer t o t h e a f f i d a v i t
f o r contempt. B r i e f s were f i l e d , t e s t i m o n y was t a k e n , e x h i b i t s
were o f f e r e d i n e v i d e n c e , o r a l argument was had and t h e m a t t e r
w a s s u b m i t t e d f o r d e c i s i o n on October 1 4 , 1976.
The a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l a t t a c k s t h e contempt p r o c e e d i n g
on t h e s e p r i n c i p a l grounds: (1) T h a t t h e r e was no c o u r t o r d e r
i n e f f e c t a t t h e t i m e he made h i s s t a t e m e n t s a t t h e Sidney
Kiwanis m e e t i n g ; ( 2 ) i f a c o u r t o r d e r d i d e x i s t , it was uncon-
s t i t u t i o n a l l y vague, i n d e f i n i t e , and ambiguous; (3) t h a t t h e
c o u r t o r d e r he i s accused of v i o l a t i n g i s i n i t s e l f a v i o l a t i o n
of t h e f r e e speech, due p r o c e s s , e q u a l p r o t e c t i o n and s e p a r a t i o n
of powers p r o v i s i o n s of t h e f e d e r a l and s t a t e c o n s t i t u t i o n s .
To r e a c h t h e m e r i t s o f t h i s c a s e , we make t h e f o l l o w i n g
p r e l i m i n a r y r u l i n g s h e r e t o f o r e t a k e n under advisement: (1) Rela-
t o r ' s e x h i b i t A ( t h e newspaper a r t i c l e of J u n e 11, 1976, i n t h e
Independent Record) i s a d m i t t e d i n e v i d e n c e ; ( 2 ) respondent's
e x h i b i t s B t h r o u g h F (newspaper a r t i c l e s ) a r e a d m i t t e d i n e v i d e n c e ;
( 3 ) a l l motions t o quash o r d i s m i s s t h i s p r o c e e d i n g a r e d e n i e d .
W e make t h e f o l l o w i n g f i n d i n g s of u l t i m a t e f a c t :
(1) T h i s C o u r t ' s o r d e r s of J u n e 1 4 and J u n e 2 1 and t h e
c o n f e r e n c e o f J u n e 2 1 were made and h e l d on t h e b a s i s of c o m p l a i n t s
and a t t h e s p e c i a l i n s t a n c e and p u b l i c r e q u e s t of t h e a t t o r n e y
general.
( 2 ) That a t no t i m e h a s t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l a p p l i e d t o
t h i s Court f o r r e l i e f from t h e o r d e r s of J u n e 1 4 and J u n e 2 1 on
any grounds.
( 3 ) That t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l w i l l f u l l y , knowingly and
d e l i b e r a t e l y v i o l a t e d t h e o r d e r o f t h i s C o u r t o f J u n e 21 d i r e c t -
i n g him, among o t h e r s t o " c e a s e and d e s i s t from a l l p u b l i c o u t - o f -
c o u r t s t a t e m e n t s t h a t may c o n c e i v a b l y i n f l u e n c e p u b l i c o p i n i o n
f o r o r a g a i n s t any p e r s o n o r i s s u e r e l a t i n g t o t h i s pending liti-
g a t i o n " by r e a s o n of h i s s t a t e m e n t s and remarks a t t h e Kiwanis
meeting of August 12 in Sidney, Montana.
(4) That the circumstances existing on June 14 and June
21 presented a clear and present danger to the proper function-
ing of the judicial processes of this state and the rights of its
citizens, the defendants, and the investigation and prosecution
of criminal cases involving workmen's compensation matters, and
that remedial action was necessary and required of this Court.
(5) That the orders of this Court of June 14 and June 21
were made in response thereto.
We conclude as a matter of law:
(1) That the orders of this Court on June 14 and June
21 were within its jurisdiction and authority pursuant to Art.
VII, Section 2 of the 1972 Montana Constitution and were in all
respects valid and legal;
(2) That the due process, equal protection, separation
of powers and freedom of speech provisions of the state and fed-
eral constitutions were not violated by the order of this Court
of June 14 and June 21, 1976, under the unique and compelling
circumstances of this case.
(3) That the remedy for any alleged prejudice to the
attorney general's political campaign lies in applying to this
Court for relief from its order of June 21, which remedy has
never been sought.
(4) That the attorney general is guilty of contempt of
court pursuant to section 93-9801(5), R.C.M. 1947, by reason of
his willful, knowing and deliberate violation of this Court's
order of June 21 commanding him, among others, to cease and
desist from all public out-of-court statements that may conceiv-
ably influence public opinion for or against any person or issue
involved in pending criminal prosecutions involving workmen's
compensation matters.
On t h e b a s i s o f t h e f o r e g o i n g f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and
c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w , w e e n t e r judgment a s f o l l o w s :
(1) The a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l i s h e r e b y a d j u d g e d g u i l t y o f
contempt o f c o u r t .
( 2 ) T h a t a f i n e o f $250 i s a s s e s s e d a s a p e n a l t y .
( 3 ) T h a t t h e a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l may p u r g e h i m s e l f o f con-
t e m p t o f c o u r t by a g r e e i n g i n open c o u r t w i t h i n 1 0 d a y s o f t h e
d a t e h e r e o f t h a t i n t h e f u t u r e h e w i l l a b i d e by t h e o r d e r o f
t h i s C o u r t o f J u n e 2 1 u n t i l t h e same i s a l t e r e d , amended o r
r e v o k e d by p r o p e r l e g a l p r o c e e d i n g s and a c c o ~ d i n g
fo law.
,/
* Chief J u s t i c e
Mr. J u s t i c e Wesley C a s t l e s i s a b s e n t a t t h e t i m e o f t h e
p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s O p i n i o n and h a s t a k e n no p a r t t h e r e i n .
H e w i l l have t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o e x p r e s s h i s v i e w s l a t e r .