In re Finley

Montana Supreme Court

In re Finley

456 P.2d 307, 153 Mont. 443, 1969 Mont. LEXIS 449

CourtMontana Supreme Court

DecidedJune 24, 1969

DocketNo. 11696

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 456 P.2d 307 (In re Finley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Finley, 456 P.2d 307, 153 Mont. 443, 1969 Mont. LEXIS 449 (Mo. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus. His grounds simply stated are that on January 14, 1966 he was sentenced to a term of five years at the state prison. After serving nineteen months he was released on parole. While on parole he was arrested on a misdemeanor charge. The disposition of the misdemeanor charge is not revealed; but two months later he was notified that his parole was being revoked. On November 25, 1967 he was returned to prison. On December 16 he was granted a [444]*444hearing before the parole board, his parole revoked, and he was ordered to serve the remainder of his sentence.

Petitioner asserts that he was not advised of his right to counsel at the time of his arrest on the misdemeanor charge. (He asserts a misdemeanor is not a crime!) He goes on to assert that he was not represented by counsel at the hearing on revocation of his parole. Thus, he reasons that his constitutional right to counsel was violated. Petitioner cites Inmates v. State of Utah, a May 1969 federal district court case as authority for his proposition. We have not seen the cited case, but believe the problem of sufficient importance to require research and briefing. Therefore we are referring the petition to the Montana Defender Project for its investigation, study, and action if indicated.

Therefore it is ordered that the petition be referred to the Montana Defender Project.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus. His grounds simply stated are that on January 14, 1966 he was sentenced to a term of five years at the state prison. After serving nineteen months he was released on parole. While on parole he was arrested on a misdemeanor charge. The disposition of the misdemeanor charge is not revealed; but two months later he was notified that his parole was being revoked. On November 25, 1967 he was returned to prison. On December 16 he was granted a [444]*444hearing before the parole board, his parole revoked, and he was ordered to serve the remainder of his sentence.

Petitioner asserts that he was not advised of his right to counsel at the time of his arrest on the misdemeanor charge. (He asserts a misdemeanor is not a crime!) He goes on to assert that he was not represented by counsel at the hearing on revocation of his parole. Thus, he reasons that his constitutional right to counsel was violated. Petitioner cites Inmates v. State of Utah, a May 1969 federal district court case as authority for his proposition. We have not seen the cited case, but believe the problem of sufficient importance to require research and briefing. Therefore we are referring the petition to the Montana Defender Project for its investigation, study, and action if indicated.

Therefore it is ordered that the petition be referred to the Montana Defender Project.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

456 P.2d 307, 153 Mont. 443, 1969 Mont. LEXIS 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-finley-mont-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack