State v. Sauter
This text of 2005 MT 312N (State v. Sauter) 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. 05-137
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2005 MT 312N
STATE OF MONTANA,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
BRAD ALLEN SAUTER,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the First Judicial District, In and For the County of Lewis and Clark, Cause No. ADC 2004-145 Honorable Dorothy McCarter, Presiding Judge
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
Jon G. Moog, Assistant Public Defender, Helena, Montana
For Respondent:
Hon. Mike McGrath, Attorney General; Tammy K. Plubell, Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana
Leo Gallagher, Lewis and Clark County Attorney; Mike Menahan, Deputy County Attorney, Helena, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: November 30, 2005
Decided: December 12, 2005
Filed:
__________________________________________ Clerk Chief Justice Karla M. Gray delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d)(v), Montana Supreme Court 1996 Internal
Operating Rules, as amended in 2003, the following memorandum decision shall not be cited
as precedent. Its case title, Supreme Court cause number and disposition shall be included in
this Court's quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana
Reports.
¶2 Brad Allen Sauter was convicted of partner or family member assault after a jury trial
in the First Judicial District Court, Lewis and Clark County. Sauter appeals, arguing that the
evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the verdict.
¶3 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section 1, Paragraph 3(d) of our
1996 Internal Operating Rules, as amended in 2003, which provides for memorandum
opinions. It is manifest on the face of the record that the appeal is without merit because the
issue is factual and, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence
was sufficient to allow a rational trier of fact to find the essential elements of partner or
family member assault beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. LaMere, 2003 MT 49, ¶ 13,
314 Mont. 326, ¶ 13, 67 P.3d 192, ¶ 13 (citation omitted).
¶4 Affirmed.
/S/ KARLA M. GRAY
We concur: 2 /S/ JAMES C. NELSON /S/ PATRICIA O. COTTER /S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART /S/ BRIAN MORRIS
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2005 MT 312N, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-sauter-mont-2005.