Mccann v. State

CourtMontana Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 27, 2022
DocketOP 22-0506
StatusUnpublished

This text of Mccann v. State (Mccann v. State) 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
Mccann v. State, (Mo. 2022).

Opinion

ORIGINAL 09/27/2022

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: OP 22-0506

OP 22-0506

ANTONIO S. MCCANN, SEP 2 7 2022 Bowen Greenwood Petitioner, Clerk of Supreme Court State of IViontana

v. ORDER BRIAN GOOTKIN, DIRECTOR, and JIM SALMONSEN, WARDEN,

Respondents.

Antonio S. McCann has filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus, or alternatively, a Writ of Prohibition, requesting a writ against the Director of the Department of Corrections (DOC) and the Warden of the Montana State Prison (MSP) after a decision from the Sentence Review Division (Division). He includes a copy of the decision. A writ of mandamus, or mandate, is provided by statute. Sections 27-26-101 through 27-26-403, MCA. To state a claim for mandamus, a party must show entitlement to the performance of a clear legal duty by the party against whom the writ is directed and the absence of a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. Section 27-26-102, MCA; Smith v. Missoula Co., 1999 MT 330, ¶ 28, 297 Mont. 368, 992 P.2d 834. McCann argues the DOC and MSP have a clear legal duty to release him and follow the Division's decision. McCann contends that he is being held "without any active sentence" because the DOC and MSP have not acted on his decreased sentence as stated in the Division's August 9, 2022 decision. He asserts that the DOC and MSP have refused "to honor this Honorable Court's Order." McCann is mistaken. The DOC and MSP may only release him after receipt of a revised sentencing judgment. After the Division issues a decision that orders a different sentence, "the court sitting in any convenient county shall resentence the person as ordered by the review division." Section 46-18-904(3), MCA. Furthermore, according to available electronic records, McCann was released to probation on September 21, 2022. McCann has not demonstrated a clear legal duty, pursuant to § 27-26-102, MCA, for such a writ to issue. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that McCann's Petition for Writ of Mandamus, or alternatively, a writ of prohibition, is DENIED and DISMISSED. DATED this Ci• day of September, 2022.

Chief Justice

LA6/2 Justices

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

Related

Smith v. County of Missoula
1999 MT 330 (Montana Supreme Court, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mccann v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccann-v-state-mont-2022.