20 Montana opinions name it 1 courts 1979–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Montana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Mountgreen2 sentences2025The district court noted that under State v. Mount, 2003 MT 275 , 317 Mont. 481 , 78 P.3d 829 , requiring Clark to register was not an ex post facto violation. 2025The district court noted that under State v. Mount, 2003 MT 275 , 317 Mont. 481 , 78 P.3d 829 , requiring Clark to register was not an ex post facto violation. | 2 | 5 |
State v. Leistikogreen2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003Leistiko, 256 Mont. at 36-37 , 844 P.2d at 100 (holding that an increase in the amount of restitution owed, based on recent parole violations, violated the ex post facto clause). ¶22 We continued to apply the Leistiko test for four years. | 2 | 2 |
Marks v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2001Marks v. United States (1977), 430 U.S. 188 , 191, 97 S.Ct. 990, 992 , 51 L.Ed.2d 260 . 2001Marks v. United States (1977), 430 U.S. 188 , 191, 97 S.Ct. 990, 992 , 51 L.Ed.2d 260 . | 1 | 3 |
Smith v. Doegreen2 sentences2003Smith, 538 U.S. 84 , 123 S.Ct. at 1146 . ¶32 The Supreme Court, however, rejected this challenge and held that Alaska’s Act did not violate the ex post facto clause. 2003Smith, 538 U.S. 84 , 123 S.Ct. at 1146 . ¶32 The Supreme Court, however, rejected this challenge and held that Alaska’s Act did not violate the ex post facto clause. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Colemangreen2 sentences2023We have thus clarified, for example, that “[a] statute is not ‘retroactive’ [in violation of the ex post facto clause] merely because it draws upon antecedent facts for its operation.” State v. Coleman, 185 Mont. 299, 317 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1012 (1979) (emphasis in original). 2023We have thus clarified, for example, that “[a] statute is not ‘retroactive’ [in violation of the ex post facto clause] merely because it draws upon antecedent facts for its operation.” State v. Coleman, 185 Mont. 299, 317 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1012 (1979) (emphasis in original). | 1 | 2 |
Stogner v. Californiagreen2 sentences2008The Court held that the California statute violated the ex post facto clause because it inflicted punishment upon Stogner where, by law, he was not liable to any punishment. 539 U.S. at 613 , 123 S. Ct. at 2450 (citations omitted). 2008The Court held that the California statute violated the ex post facto clause because it inflicted punishment upon Stogner where, by law, he was not liable to any punishment. 539 U.S. at 613 , 123 S. Ct. at 2450 (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Maldonadogreen2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati | 1 | 1 |
State v. Suistegreen2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 1 |
| Stratemeyer v. Lincoln Countygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Durocher v. Myersgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Montana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Brander
green
2 sentences2022Brander, 280 Mont. at 157 , 930 P.2d at 36 . ¶16 Peralta takes the ex post facto analysis from Brander to argue that his issue is the ex post facto application of the 1989 amendment to his 1990 DUI conviction—not to his 2015 DUI sentence. 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 2 | 2003–2022 |
State Ex Rel. Nelson v. Ellsworth
green
2 sentences2015Nelson v. Ellsworth, 142 Mont. 14 , 380 P.2d 886 (1963). 2015Nelson v. Ellsworth, 142 Mont. 14 , 380 P.2d 886 (1963). | 2 | 2014–2015 |
State v. Spurlock
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003Leistiko, 256 Mont. at 36-37 , 844 P.2d at 100 (holding that an increase in the amount of restitution owed, based on recent parole violations, violated the ex post facto clause). ¶22 We continued to apply the Leistiko test for four years. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Beachman
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Azure
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Gone
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Hall
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Cooney
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Beckman
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Frazier v. Montana State Department of Corrections Ex Rel. Montana Adult Probation & Parole
green
2 sentences2003Then, in 1996, we adopted a third version in Frazier v. Montana State Dept. of Corrections (1996), 277 Mont. 82 , 920 P.2d 93 . 2003Then, in 1996, we adopted a third version in Frazier v. Montana State Dept. of Corrections (1996), 277 Mont. 82 , 920 P.2d 93 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
In Re Game Farm License Number 319 of Brogan
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
In Re Young
neutral
2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Goebel
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Duffy
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Wright v. Mahoney
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 2003See State v. Suiste (1993), 261 Mont. 251, 253 , 862 P.2d 399, 401 ; State v. Brander (1996), 280 Mont. 148, 153 , 930 P.2d 31, 35 ; Matter of Brogan (1997), 283 Mont. 413, 422 , 942 P.2d 100, 106 ; State v. Beckman (1997), 284 Mont. 459, 463 , 944 P.2d 756, 759 ; State v. Cooney (1997), 284 Mont. 500, 505 , 945 P.2d 891, 893-94 ; In re Young, 1999 MT 195, ¶ 14 , 295 Mont. 394, ¶ 14 , 983 P.2d 985, ¶ 14 ; State v. Duffy, 2000 MT 186, ¶ 29 , 300 Mont. 381, ¶ 29 , 6 P.3d 453, ¶ 29 ; State v. Goebel, 2001 MT 155, ¶ 28 , 306 Mont. 83, ¶ 28 , 31 P.3d 340, ¶ 28 ; Wright v. Mahoney, 2003 MT 141, ¶ 7 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez
green
2 sentences2003Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. at 168-69 , 83 S.Ct. at 567-68 . ¶36 Under the Supreme Court’s analysis, if, in totality, these factors result in the effect of the law being nonpunitive, then, combined with the nonpunitive intent of the law, the law will not be held to violate the ex post facto clause. 2003Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. at 168-69 , 83 S.Ct. at 567-68 . ¶36 Under the Supreme Court’s analysis, if, in totality, these factors result in the effect of the law being nonpunitive, then, combined with the nonpunitive intent of the law, the law will not be held to violate the ex post facto clause. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
McKeesport Area School District v. Pennsylvania Department of Education
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev'd on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶ 21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rat | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Montana v. Hall
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Coleman v. Montana
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev'd on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶ 21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rat | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Pfister v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.
green
2 sentences2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev’d on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rati 2003See State v. Maldonado (1978), 176 Mont. 322, 328 , 578 P.2d 296, 300 ; State v. Gone (1978), 179 Mont. 271, 280 , 587 P.2d 1291, 1297 ; State v. Azure (1978), 179 Mont. 281, 282 , 587 P.2d 1297, 1298 ; State v. Coleman (1979), 185 Mont. 299, 314 , 605 P.2d 1000, 1010 , cert denied, 446 U.S. 970 , 100 S.Ct. 2952 , 64 L.Ed.2d 831 ; State v. Beachman (1980), 189 Mont. 400, 406 , 616 P.2d 337, 340-41 ; State v. Hall (1986), 224 Mont. 187, 189 , 728 P.2d 1339, 1340 , rev'd on other grounds by 481 U.S. 400 , 107 S.Ct. 1825 , 95 L.Ed.2d 354 . ¶ 21 However, in 1992, without stating any particular rat | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Miller v. Florida
green
2 sentences2003This version was adopted from Miller v. Florida (1987), 482 U.S. 423, 430 , 107 S.Ct. 2446, 2451 , 96 L.Ed.2d 351 , and specifically stated that a law was ex post facto if it: (1) was retrospective; and (2) disadvantaged the offender affected by it. 2003This version was adopted from Miller v. Florida (1987), 482 U.S. 423, 430 , 107 S.Ct. 2446, 2451 , 96 L.Ed.2d 351 , and specifically stated that a law was ex post facto if it: (1) was retrospective; and (2) disadvantaged the offender affected by it. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
United States v. Morrow
green
1 sentence2000In U.S. v. Marrow (5th Cir. 1999), 177 F.3d 272,294 , the circuit court of appeals reviewed a situation similar to Duffy’s and held that applying a revised ten-year statute of limitation for bank fraud prosecution was proper and did not violate the ex post facto clause because the initial five-year statute of limitations had not run when the revised ten-year limitations period was enacted, even though the defendant was not indicted within five years of the relevant conduct. ¶32 In this case, § 45-1-205, MCA (1985), was amended before the original statute of limitations applicable to Duffy’s co | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Steer, Inc. v. Department of Revenue green | 1 | 1996–1996 |
| Cummings v. Missouri green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Russell R. Maggard v. Donald Wyrick green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| Weaver v. Graham green | 1 | 1992–1992 |
| McClanathan v. Smith green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| Dobbert v. Florida green | 1 | 1980–1980 |
| Hopt v. People of Territory of Utah green | 1 | 1979–1979 |
| Thompson v. Utah red | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.