Archive | September, 2014

State v. Nauman

State v. Nauman, 2014 MT 248 (Sept. 16, 2014) (5-0) Wheat, J.

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred by departing from the plea agreement without giving Nauman the opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea; (2) whether the district court erred by imposing particular conditions on Nauman’s sentence; and (3) whether the term “pornography” in condition 31 of Nauman’s sentence is unconstitutionally vague.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; (2) no; and (3) the Court declines to address this issue as it was not raised before the district court.

Reversed in part & affirmed in part

Thieltges v. Royal Alliance Associates, Inc.

Thieltges v. Royal Alliance Associates, Inc., 2014 MT 247 (Sept. 16, 2014) (5-0) McKinnon, J.

Issue: Whether the status of Royal Alliance’s agent as a registered securities salesperson was a self-concealing fact supporting a delay in the running of the statute of limitations.

Short Answer: No.

Affirmed

Malcolmson v. Liberty Northwest

Malcolmson v. Liberty Northwest, 2014 MT 242 (Sept. 10, 2014) (7-0) Cotter, J.

Issue: Whether MCA § 39-71-604(3), requiring a work comp claimant to authorize the insurer to communicate with health care providers without prior notice to the employee, violates Malcolmson’s constitutional right to privacy.

Short Answer: Yes. Applying strict scrutiny, the Court determines the statute is facially unconstitutional. It is justified by a compelling state interest but is not narrowly tailored to effect that interest.

Affirmed

State v. Zunick

State v. Zunick, 2014 MT 239 (Sept. 9, 2014) (4-1) Cotter, J., for the majority; McGrath, C.J., dissenting

Issue: Whether the district court erred when it did not provide Zunick the opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea at sentencing pursuant to § 46-12-211(4), MCA, and subsequently denying Zunick’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea.

Short Answer: Yes.

Reversed & remanded for resentencing