Archive | June, 2016

In the Matter of SH

In the Matter of SH, 2016 MT 137 (June 7, 2016) (McKinnon, J.) (5-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court relied on sufficient evidence to determine SH required commitment, and (2) whether SH received ineffective assistance of counsel.

Short Answer: (1) Yes, and (2) no.

Affirmed

Facts: SH sought help from the Billings Clinic ER in November 2014, complaining there were snakes in her stomach, black bugs in the toilet, and the voices of God and Satan were arguing in her head. A psychiatrist at the clinic examined her and, upon his recommendation, the state petitioned to involuntarily commit SH on November 12, 2014. The district court ordered SH detained at the clinic pending resolution of the petition, appointed counsel to represent SH, and appointed the clinic psychiatrist as the professional person to evaluate SH.…

Martinell v. Bd. of County Comm’rs of Carbon County

Martinell v. Bd. of County Comm’rs of Carbon County, 2016 MT 136 (June 7, 2016) (Rice, J.; Cotter, J., dissenting) (4-1, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred by holding that the Carbon County commissioners acted arbitrarily in waiving compliance with county resolution zoning requirements; (2) whether the protest provision in the Part 1 zoning statute, § 76-2-101(5), MCA, is unconstitutional; and (3) whether the Carbon County commissioners’ reliance on the Part 1 protest provision render their decision unlawful. 

Short Answer: (1) No; (2) the Court declines to reach this issue; and (3) the Court declines to reach this issue.

Affirmed

Facts: Appellants are a group of private landowners (“Landowners”) in Carbon County who initiated a petition to establish a Part 1 zoning district pursuant to § 76-2-101, MCA.…