State v. Perry

                           No. 14446
         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

                              1979


THE STATE OF MONTANA,

                        Plaintiff and Respondent,
       -vs-
FRED PERRY,

                        Defendant and Appellant.


Appeal from:   District Court of the Third Judicial District,
               Honorable Robert J. Boyd, Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
   For Appellant:

       Byron Boggs argued, Anaconda, Montana
   For Respondent :

       Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana
       Chris D. Tweeten, Assistant Attorney General, argued,
        Helena, Montana
       James J. Masar, County Attorney, Deer Lodge, Montana


                                Submitted:   January 30, 1979
                                  DecidedqEF   1 F, :q79
M r . J u s t i c e John Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e
Court.


        Defendant was c h a r g e d w i t h o n e c o u n t o f p o s s e s s i o n o f a
weapon by a p r i s o n e r and one c o u n t of a g g r a v a t e d a s s a u l t .

H e w a s c o n v i c t e d o f b o t h c o u n t s f o l l o w i n g a t r i a l by j u r y i n

Powell County i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e T h i r d J u d i c i a l

D i s t r i c t , t h e Honorable R o b e r t J . Boyd, p r e s i d i n g .           Xe

appeals.

        T h i s c a s e a r o s e o u t of a p r i s o n a l t e r c a t i o n i n which

i n m a t e A n t h e l Brown s u s t a i n e d s e v e r e i n j u r i e s .    Brown and

d e f e n d a n t had f o u g h t on a t l e a s t one o c c a s i o n p r i o r t o t h e

J a n u a r y 1 5 , 1978, i n c i d e n t which r e s u l t e d i n t h e f i l i n g of

t h e s e charges.         According t o t h e t e s t i m o n y developed a t

t r i a l , Brown c o n f r o n t e d d e f e n d a n t when h e e n t e r e d t h e p r i s o n

r e c r e a t i o n a r e a and showed him a s h a r p e n e d f i l e .            Defendant

t h e n walked t o t h e o t h e r end of t h e room and armed h i m s e l f

with a metal pipe.                H e concealed t h e p i p e i n h i s c l o t h i n g

and d i s r e g a r d e d a n o r d e r from a p r i s o n o f f i c e r t h a t h e s t o p

t o be searched.             Upon r e a c h i n g Brown, h e proceeded t o de-

l i v e r numerous blows t o Brown's head and l e g s .                         Brown a l s o

i n c u r r e d s t a b wounds i n t h e c h e s t of undetermined o r i g i n .

        Defendant p r e s e n t s t h r e e i s s u e s on a p p e a l , which c a n b e

summarized and s t a t e d a s f o l l o w s :

        1.     Whether t h e j u r y ' s f i n d i n g t h a t d e f e n d a n t was i n

p o s s e s s i o n of a d e a d l y weapon w i t h o u t l a w f u l a u t h o r i t y i s

s u p p o r t e d by t h e e v i d e n c e .
        2.     Whether d e f e n d a n t ' s c o n v i c t i o n f o r t h e o f f e n s e of
p o s s e s s i o n o f a weapon by a p r i s o n e r v i o l a t e s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
o r s t a t u t o r y p r o h i b i t i o n s a g a i n s t d o u b l e jeopardy.

        3.     Whether s e c t i o n 94-8-213,             R.C.M.        1947, now s e c t i o n
45-8-318       MCA,     i s u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y vague.
        Each of d e f e n d a n t ' s i s s u e s i n v o l v e s h i s c o n v i c t i o n f o r

t h e o f f e n s e of p o s s e s s i o n of a weapon by a p r i s o n e r .            Ad-

dressing t h e f i r s t i s s u e , defendant a s s e r t s t h a t t h e D i s -

t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d by n o t g r a n t i n g h i s motion f o r a d i r e c t e d

v e r d i c t made on t h e grounds t h a t t h e evidence was n o t s u f f i -

c i e n t t o support t h e conviction.

        Defendant's argument i s broken i n t o two p a r t s .                         First,

he a s s e r t s t h a t t h e m e t a l p i p e he possessed was n o t l i s t e d

a s a d e a d l y weapon i n s e c t i o n 94-8-213,              R.C.M.       1947, now

s e c t i o n 45-8-318      MCA,      and was n o t " i n t r i n s i c a l l y a d e a d l y

weapon."        Furthermore, d e f e n d a n t contends he needed no

s p e c i a l a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o p o s s e s s t h e p i p e , and t h e S t a t e

t h e r e f o r e f a i l e d t o prove t h a t he possessed t h e p i p e "with-

o u t law£u l a u t h o r i t y . "

        S e c t i o n 94-8-213,        R.C.M.     1 9 4 7 , now s e c t i o n 45-8-318

MCA, p r o v i d e s i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t :

        "Every p r i s o n e r committed t o t h e Montana s t a t e
        p r i s o n , who, w h i l e a t such s t a t e p r i s o n        .  .  .
        p o s s e s s e s o r c a r r i e s upon h i s person o r has
        under h i s custody o r c o n t r o l w i t h o u t l a w f u l
        a u t h o r i t y , a d i r k , dagger, p i s t o l , revolver,
        s l i n g s h o t , swordcane, b i l l y , knuckles made of
        any m e t a l o r hard s u b s t a n c e , k n i f e , r a z o r , n o t
        i n c l u d i n g a s a f e t y r a z o r , o r o t h e r d e a d l y wea-
        pon, i s g u i l t y of a f e l o n y and s h a l l be punish-
        a b l e by imprisonment i n t h e s t a t e p r i s o n f o r a
        t e r m n o t l e s s t h a n f i v e ( 5 ) y e a r s nor more than
        f i f t e e n (15) y e a r s . Such term of imprisonment
        t o commence from t h e time he would have o t h e r -
        w i s e been r e l e a s e d from s a i d p r i s o n . "         (Empha-
        s i s added.)
For purposes of t h e "Criminal Code of 1973", "weapon" i s

d e f i n e d i n s e c t i o n 94-2-101(65),          R.C.M.     1947, now s e c t i o n
45-2-101 (65) MCA:
        "'Weapon' means any i n s t r u m e n t , a r t i c l e , o r sub-
        s t a n c e which, r e g a r d l e s s of -s primary f u n c t i o n ,
                                               - it
        i s r e a d i l y c a p a b l e of being used t o produce d e a t h
        o r serious bodily injury."               (Emphasis added.)
         Defendant c o n t e n d s t h a t a m e t a l p i p e d o e s n o t f i t

w i t h i n t h e c a t e g o r y o f " o t h e r d e a d l y weapon" a s it i s

 i n t e n d e d i n s e c t i o n 94-8-213,        R.C.M.      1947, now s e c t i o n 45-8-

318 MCA.         A r e v i e w of t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s g i v e n t o t h e j u r y ,

however, r e v e a l s t h a t t h e j u r y w a s i n s t r u c t e d a s t o t h e

meaning o f t h e term " b i l l y " .              I n s t r u c t i o n No. 10 r e a d :

" ' B i l l y ' means a c l u b . "        W e f i n d t h a t t h e metal p i p e wielded

by d e f e n d a n t was c l e a r l y a c l u b w i t h i n t h e common under-

standing of t h a t t e r m .            A s a r e s u l t , w e need n o t r e a c h t h e

q u e s t i o n o f what may b e i n c l u d e d i n t h e p h r a s e " o t h e r d e a d l y

weapon" a s i t a p p e a r s i n t h e s t a t u t e .

        Nor d o e s t h e r e c o r d s u p p o r t d e f e n d a n t ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t
t h e S t a t e f a i l e d t o p r o v e h i s p o s s e s s i o n of t h e p i p e was

without lawful authorization.                        I n substance, Burt S o l l e , t h e

p r i s o n r e c r e a t i o n d i r e c t o r , t e s t i f i e d t h a t defendant could

p o s s e s s t h e t o o l s n e c e s s a r y t o c o m p l e t e a j o b w i t h o u t "spe-
c i a l a u t h o r i z a t i o n " w h i l e working on t h e job.             However, h e

d i d n o t t e s t i f y t h a t d e f e n d a n t had t h e a u t h o r i t y t o p o s s e s s

t h e m e t a l p i p e under a l l c i r c u m s t a n c e s .       Furthermore, p r i s o n

o f f i c e r Frank K n a d l e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t d e f e n d a n t ' s p o s s e s s i o n

o f t h e p i p e f o r p u r p o s e s o t h e r t h a n i t s u s e as a w e i g h t b a r

o r t o o l was a v i o l a t i o n of p r i s o n r e g u l a t i o n s .        Finally,
d e f e n d a n t ' s c o n d u c t i n h i d i n g t h e b a r under h i s c l o t h i n g and

ignoring an o r d e r t o submit t o a s e a r c h i n d i c a t e s t h a t he

knew h e w a s e x c e e d i n g h i s l a w f u l a u t h o r i t y i n p o s s e s s i n g t h e

pipe.
        With r e s p e c t t o h i s d o u b l e j e o p a r y c l a i m , d e f e n d a n t ar-
g u e s t h a t t h e c h a r g e of p o s s e s s i o n of a weapon by a p r i s o n e r
c o n s t i t u t e d , under t h e f a c t s of t h e i n s t a n t c a s e , a n o f -
f e n s e i n c l u d e d i n t h e c h a r g e of a g g r a v a t e d a s s a u l t .

S e c t i o n 95-1711 ( 2 ) ( a ) , R . C . M .    1947, now s e c t i o n 46-11-502
MCA,     a d d r e s s e s t h e d o u b l e jeopardy p r i n c i p l e advanced by

defendant:

        " ( 2 ) When t h e same t r a n s a c t i o n may e s t a b l i s h t h e
        commission o f more t h a n one o f f e n s e , a p e r s o n
        c h a r g e d w i t h s u c h c o n d u c t may b e p r o s e c u t e d f o r
        each such offense.               H e may n o t , however, be con-
        v i c t e d of more t h a n o n e o f f e n s e i f :

         " (a) one o f f e n s e i s included i n t h e o t h e r ;              'I



                                           ,
        S e c t i o n 95-1711 (1)( b ) ( i ) R.C.M.              1947, now s e c t i o n 46-

1 1 - 5 0 1 ( 2 ) ( a ) MCA, d e f i n e s a n " i n c l u d e d o f f e n s e " .    I t provides:

         " ( b ) An o f f e n s e i s a n i n c l u d e d o f f e n s e when:

        " ( i ) i t i s e s t a b l i s h e d by proof o f t h e same o r
        less t h a n a l l t h e f a c t s r e q u i r e d t o e s t a b l i s h
        t h e commission o f t h e o f f e n s e c h a r g e d ; "

        I t a p p e a r s t h e n t h a t two d i s t i n c t e l e m e n t s , n o t e l e -

ments o f t h e o f f e n s e o f a g g r a v a t e d a s s a u l t , must b e proved

by t h e S t a t e t o s u s t a i n a c o n v i c t i o n on a c h a r g e of p o s s e s -

s i o n o f a weapon by a p r i s o n e r .             The S t a t e must p r o v e (1)

t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l i n v o l v e d was a p r i s o n e r a t t h e t i m e t h e

o f f e n s e was committed, and ( 2 ) t h a t h i s p o s s e s s i o n of t h e

weapon was u n a u t h o r i z e d .        Therefore, defendant's convictions

d o n o t v i o l a t e p r o h i b i t i o n s a g a i n s t d o u b l e jeopardy.

        I n t h e f i n a l i s s u e p r e s e n t e d by d e f e n d a n t , h e a s s e r t s

t h a t s e c t i o n 94-8-213,        R.C.M.      1947, now s e c t i o n 45-8-318

MCA,    i s a n u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y vague s t a t u t e and t h e r e f o r e

v i o l a t i v e of due p r o c e s s .      The r u l e i n Montana i s t h a t

"unless [a s t a t u t e ] i s s u f f i c i e n t l y e x p l i c i t s o t h a t a l l

t h o s e s u b j e c t t o t h e p e n a l t i e s may know what t o a v o i d , i t

v i o l a t e s t h e e s s e n t i a l s o f due p r o c e s s . "     S t a t e ex r e l .

G r i f f i n v . Greene ( 1 9 3 7 ) , 104 Mont. 460, 467, 67 P.2d 995,

999.      S e c t i o n 94-8-213,        now s e c t i o n 45-8-318          MCA, p r o v i d e s ,

among o t h e r t h i n g s , t h a t u n a u t h o r i z e d p o s s e s s i o n by a

prisoner of a c l u b i s a punishable offense.                              A reasonable
person would know possession of such an object is an offense
only if it is possession without authorization.
      The conviction is affirmed.




We Concur:




             Q.
      Justices
  i