State Ex Rel Adams v. Dist. Court
This text of State Ex Rel Adams v. Dist. Court (State Ex Rel Adams v. Dist. Court) 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.
Opinion
No. 13254
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF M N A A OTN
THE STATE O M N A A on t h e r e l a t i o n o f F OTN FRANK ADAMS,
Relator,
THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE O MONTANA, i n and F f o r t h e County o f Powell, and t h e HON. ROBERT J. BOYD, Judge t h e r e o f ,
Respondents.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING:
Counsel o f Record :
For Relator:
P h i l i p W. S t r o p e a r g u e d , Helena, Montana
F o r Respondents:
James J. Masar, County A t t o r n e y , Deer Lodge, Montana A l b e r t W. Meloling, S p e c i a l Deputy County A t t o r n e y , a r g u e d , Helena, Montana
Submitted : J a n u a r y 23, 1976 4 ('-1' Decided: CFB 3 k idrb PER CURIAM: This i s an a p p l i c a t i o n by a newspaper r e p o r t e r f o r a w r i t of s u p e r v i s o r y c o n t r o l t o quash a subpoena duces tecum served upon him i n a pending c r i m i n a l c a s e . R e l a t o r i s Frank Adams, a r e p o r t e r f o r t h e Tribune, a d a i l y newspaper published i n Great F a l l s , Montana. O October n 21, 1975, he a l l e g e d l y r e c e i v e d a l e t t e r from L. R. B r e t z , e x c e r p t s from which were quoted and a t t r i b u t e d t o B r e t z i n a news a r t i c l e published i n t h e Tribune t h e following day. The news a r t i c l e d e a l t w i t h c h a r g e s by B r e t z t h a t i n a number of i n s t a n c e s h i s r i g h t s had been v i o l a t e d i n t h e Missoula county j a i l where he had been t r a n s - ferred a f t e r allegedly conspiring with others i n the s t a t e prison t o have Attorney General Robert Woodahl k i l l e d . According t o t h e news a r t i c l e , Bretz charged (1) d e n i a l of adequate a c c e s s t o law books i n working on h i s d e f e n s e , (2) d e n i a l o f h i s r i g h t t o c o r r e s - pond w i t h and b e interviewed by r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of t h e news media,
(3) l i m i t a t i o n s on v i s i t a t i o n by h i s w i f e and t h e conduct of b u s i n e s s a f f a i r s w i t h h i s former p e r s o n a l s e c r e t a r y , (4) a s e a r c h of h i s c e l l by t h e s h e r i f f ' s f o r c e f o r h i s p e r s o n a l l e g a l f i l e s c o n t a i n i n g s t a t e m e n t s he had taken from v a r i o u s p r i s o n e r s concerning a key p r o s e c u t i o n w i t n e s s , (5) r e a d i n g and p h o t o s t a t i n g h i s m a i l , ( 6 ) h i s t r a n s f e r t o t h e Missoula County j a i l without due process o f law, (7) d e n i a l o f medical c a r e , (8) u n s a n i t a r y j a i l f a c i l i t i e s , (9) i n - s u f f i c i e n t food and e x e r c i s e , and (10) t a k i n g p r i s o n e r s t o c o u r t i n j a i l c l o t h i n g c o n s i s t i n g of a white c o v e r a l l and rubber shower shoes. On October 23, 1975, t h e s t a t e f i l e d an amended Information
a g a i n s t B r e t z and Merrel J. C l i n e i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t of Powell County charging them w i t h a s e r i e s of crimes: (1) Conspiracy t o commit d e l i b e r a t e homicide. (2) S o l i c i t a t i o n t o commit d e l i b e r a t e homicide. ( 3 ) P e r j u r y . (4) Tampering w i t h w i t n e s s e s . (5) F a b r i c a t i n g p h y s i c a l evidence. O November 13, 1975, t h e s t a t e served a subpoena duces tecum n on r e l a t o r Adams commanding him t o produce t h e o r i g i n a l l e t t e r a l l e g e d l y r e c e i v e d by him from Bretz o r show cause f o r h i s f a i l u r e t o do so. R e l a t o r Adams appeared by motion t o quash t h e subpoena duces tecum. Following h e a r i n g t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t of Powell County, t h e Hon. Robert J. Boyd, d i s t r i c t judge, e n t e r e d an o r d e r denying Adams' motion t o quash t o g e t h e r w i t h a memorandum opinion. The g i s t of t h e memorandum opinion was t h a t t h e B r e t z l e t t e r was n o t p r o t e c t e d by t h e s t a t u t o r y newsman's p r i v i l e g e contained i n s e c t i o n s 93-601-1, 93- 601-2 and 93-701-4(8), R.C.M. 1947, because n e i t h e r t h e w r i t e r n o r t h e newsman intended t o p r o t e c t t h e source of t h e information n o r maintain i n confidence t h e c o n t e n t s t h e r e o f ; t h e newsman waived t h e p r i v i l e g e i n any e v e n t by p u b l i c a t i o n of p o r t i o n s of t h e l e t t e r and d i s c l o s u r e of t h e i d e n t i t y of t h e w r i t e r ; and t h a t n e i t h e r t h e F i r s t Amendment t o t h e United S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n n o r A r t i c l e 11, S e c t i o n
7 , 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n was a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e c a s e . R e l a t o r Adams contends t h a t t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n denying h i s motion t o quash t h e subpoena duces tecum. He r a i s e s t h r e e s u b s t a n t i v e i s s u e s underlying t h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n : (1) Are t h e c o n t e n t s of t h e l e t t e r m a t e r i a l , r e l e v a n t and n e c e s s a r y t o t h e t r i a l of t h e c r i m i n a l c a s e a g a i n s t B r e t z and C l i n e ? (2) I s t h e l e t t e r a p r i v i l e g e d communication under t h e F i r s t Amendment t o t h e United S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n ; A r t i c l e 11, Section 7 , 1972 Nontana C o n s t i t u t i o n , o r t h e s t a t u t o r y newsman's p r i v i l e g e ? ( 3 ) Did t h e r e p o r t e r waive t h e p r i v i l e g e and i f s o , t o what e x t e n t ? W e a r e unable t o determine t h e m e r i t s o f t h e s e i s s u e s on
t h e record before us. N c o u r t i s a b l e t o determine t h e r e l e v a n c y , o m a t e r i a l i t y , n e c e s s i t y o r a p p l i c a b i l i t y $of t h e s t a t u t e s o r c o n s t i - t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n s of an item of evidence u n l e s s t h a t item i s f i r s t presented t o t h e c o u r t f o r examination. The a p p l i c a b l e r u l e o f law has been s t a t e d i n t h i s language by P r o f e s s o r Wigmore i n h i s t r e a t i s e on evidence, 8 Wigmore, Evidence 5 2200, pp. 127-129 (McNaughton r e v . f I $< v.- ., -1- i t is ablv i o u s l v n u t for t h l witness t o withhold e t h e documents upon h i s mere a s s e r t i o n t h a t t h e y a r e n o t r e l e v a n t (92210 i n f r a ) o r t h a t t h e y a r e p r i v i l e g e d . It i s h i s d u t y t o b r i n g what t h e c o u r t r e q u i r e s . The c o u r t can t h e n t o i t s own s a t i s f a c t i o n d e t e r m i n e by i n s p e c t i o n w h e t 'h e r t h e documents ~ r o d u c e da r e i r r e l e v a n - o - ~ -r- i- - -i- l - ~ e ..----, - - t -r - - v . - -. . e T h i s does n o t d e p r i v e t h e w i t n e s s unduly o f any r i g h t s of p r i v a c y , s i n c e t h e c o u r t ' s d e t e r m i n a t i o ; i s made by i t s own i n s p e c t i o n , w i t h o u t s u b m i t t i n g t h e documents t o t h e o p p o n e n t ' s view." (Emphasis a d d e d ) . 'See a l s o : 8 1 Am J u r 2d W i t n e s s e s , 920; Ex P a r t e Monroe County Bank, 254 Ala. 515, 49 S.2d 1 6 1 , 23 ALR2d 856. I n t h i s c a s e t h e r e l a t o r h a s n o t produced t h e B r e t z l e t t e r f o r i n s p e c t i o n by t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i n o r d e r t o e n a b l e i t t o p r o p e r l y
r u l e on t h e i s s u e s h e now raises. The a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a w r i t of s u p e r v i s o r y c o n t r o l i s d e n i e d without prejudice.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State Ex Rel Adams v. Dist. Court, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-adams-v-dist-court-mont-1976.