Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Montana opinions name it 1 courts 2005–2026 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Matter of SLMgreen1 sentence2020See State v. Egdorf, 2003 MT 264, ¶ 12 , 317 Mont. 436 , 77 P.3d 517 ; State v. Bedwell, 1999 MT 206, ¶ 4 , 295 Mont. 476 , 985 P.2d 150 ; In re S.L.M., 287 Mont. 23, 32 , 951 P.2d 1365, 1370 (1997). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Egdorfgreen2 sentences2020See State v. Egdorf, 2003 MT 264, ¶ 12 , 317 Mont. 436 , 77 P.3d 517 ; State v. Bedwell, 1999 MT 206, ¶ 4 , 295 Mont. 476 , 985 P.2d 150 ; In re S.L.M., 287 Mont. 23, 32 , 951 P.2d 1365, 1370 (1997). 2020See State v. Egdorf, 2003 MT 264, ¶ 12 , 317 Mont. 436 , 77 P.3d 517 ; State v. Bedwell, 1999 MT 206, ¶ 4 , 295 Mont. 476 , 985 P.2d 150 ; In re S.L.M., 287 Mont. 23, 32 , 951 P.2d 1365, 1370 (1997). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. T.M.green1 sentence2012Cf. T.M., 330 F.3d at 1240-41 (“[M]ore recent relevant events may revive old offenses and justify the imposition of supervised release conditions related to sex offender status.”). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Johnsongreen2 sentences2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. 2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. | 1 | 1 |
cluster 746284green2 sentences2005See Mount, ¶ 68 (indicating that Mount’s violation of the registration requirement occurred after enactment of the Act, and so was not at issue in his ex post facto challenge to the Act’s registration requirement nor in our analysis of the intent and effect of the Act); accord Russell v. Gregoire (9th Cir. 1997), 124 F.3d 1079, 1088 , noting that no ex post facto problem exists when one is punished for failure to register under Washington’s sexual offender registration act). 2005See Mount, ¶ 68 (indicating that Mount's violation of the registration requirement occurred after enactment of the Act, and so was not at issue in his ex post facto challenge to the Act's registration requirement nor in our analysis of the intent and effect of the Act); accord Russell v. Gregoire (9th Cir. 1997), 124 F.3d 1079, 1088 , noting that no ex post facto problem exists when one is punished for failure to register under Washington's sexual offender registration act). | 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. Southwick
green
2 sentences2009C.D.H. argued that this Court long has held “that the person must be sentenced under the statute in effect at the time of the offense.” C.D.H. cited for support, our decision in State v. Southwick, 2007 MT 257, ¶ 25 , 339 Mont. 281, ¶ 25 , 169 P.3d 698, ¶ 25 , and other related cases. 2009C.D.H. argued that this Court long has held “that the person must be sentenced under the statute in effect at the time of the offense.” C.D.H. cited for support, our decision in State v. Southwick, 2007 MT 257, ¶ 25 , 339 Mont. 281, ¶ 25 , 169 P.3d 698, ¶ 25 , and other related cases. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Lott v. State
green
2 sentences2026Although facially invalid sentences are not time-barred for purposes of habeas corpus, see Lott v. State, 2006 MT 279, ¶ 22 , 334 Mont. 270 , 150 P.3d 337 , the District Court’s requirement that K.A.B. register was not facially invalid. ¶14 Finally, K.A.B. argues that the District Court erred by denying his motion for a protective order. 2026Although facially invalid sentences are not time-barred for purposes of habeas corpus, see Lott v. State, 2006 MT 279, ¶ 22 , 334 Mont. 270 , 150 P.3d 337 , the District Court’s requirement that K.A.B. register was not facially invalid. ¶14 Finally, K.A.B. argues that the District Court erred by denying his motion for a protective order. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
In re S.L.M.
green
1 sentence2020See State v. Egdorf, 2003 MT 264, ¶ 12 , 317 Mont. 436 , 77 P.3d 517 ; State v. Bedwell, 1999 MT 206, ¶ 4 , 295 Mont. 476 , 985 P.2d 150 ; In re S.L.M., 287 Mont. 23, 32 , 951 P.2d 1365, 1370 (1997). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Bedwell
green
2 sentences2020See State v. Egdorf, 2003 MT 264, ¶ 12 , 317 Mont. 436 , 77 P.3d 517 ; State v. Bedwell, 1999 MT 206, ¶ 4 , 295 Mont. 476 , 985 P.2d 150 ; In re S.L.M., 287 Mont. 23, 32 , 951 P.2d 1365, 1370 (1997). 2020See State v. Egdorf, 2003 MT 264, ¶ 12 , 317 Mont. 436 , 77 P.3d 517 ; State v. Bedwell, 1999 MT 206, ¶ 4 , 295 Mont. 476 , 985 P.2d 150 ; In re S.L.M., 287 Mont. 23, 32 , 951 P.2d 1365, 1370 (1997). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Villanueva
green
2 sentences2011Laws of Montana, 2001, ch. 152, §1, at 719; State v. Villanueva, 2005 MT 192, ¶ 15 , 328 Mont. 135 , 118 P.3d 179 . 2011Laws of Montana, 2001, ch. 152, §1, at 719; State v. Villanueva, 2005 MT 192, ¶ 15 , 328 Mont. 135 , 118 P.3d 179 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
United States v. Juvenile Male
green
2 sentences2011United States v. Juvenile Male, 590 F.3d 924 (9th Cir.2010). 2011United States v. Juvenile Male, 590 F.3d 924 (9th Cir. 2010). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Albert
green
2 sentences2009State v. Hastings, 2007 MT 294, ¶ 19 , 340 Mont. 1 , 171 P.3d 726 . ¶13 While the registration requirement for sexual offenders specifically applies to a discrete list of offenses, Montana law allows broader application if the defendant agrees. 2009State v. Hastings, 2007 MT 294, ¶ 19 , 340 Mont. 1 , 171 P.3d 726 . ¶13 While the registration requirement for sexual offenders specifically applies to a discrete list of offenses, Montana law allows broader application if the defendant agrees. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Hastings
green
2 sentences2009State v. Hastings, 2007 MT 294, ¶ 19 , 340 Mont. 1 , 171 P.3d 726 . ¶13 While the registration requirement for sexual offenders specifically applies to a discrete list of offenses, Montana law allows broader application if the defendant agrees. 2009State v. Hastings, 2007 MT 294, ¶ 19 , 340 Mont. 1 , 171 P.3d 726 . ¶13 While the registration requirement for sexual offenders specifically applies to a discrete list of offenses, Montana law allows broader application if the defendant agrees. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Whitmer
green
2 sentences2007Whitmer, 285 Mont. at 103 , 946 P.2d at 139 . ¶12 The 2001 Montana Legislature explicitly stated that the provisions of the Act applied retroactively. 2007Whitmer, 285 Mont. at 103 , 946 P.2d at 139 . ¶12 The 2001 Montana Legislature explicitly stated that the provisions of the Act applied retroactively. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Lenihan
green
2 sentences2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. 2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Finley
green
2 sentences2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. 2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Ommundson
green
2 sentences2006First he argues that this requirement has no correlation or connection to the underlying offense as required by State v. Ommundson, 1999 MT 16 , 293 Mont. 133 , 974 P.2d 620 . 2006First he argues that this requirement has no correlation or connection to the underlying offense as required by State v. Ommundson, 1999 MT 16 , 293 Mont. 133 , 974 P.2d 620 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Gallagher
green
2 sentences2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. 2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
State v. Eaton
green
2 sentences2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. 2006State v. Johnson, 2005 MT 48, ¶ 5 , 326 Mont. 161, ¶ 5 , 108 P.3d 485, ¶ 5 ; State v. Eaton, 2004 MT 283 , ¶ 2 11, 323 Mont. 287, ¶ 11 , 99 P.3d 661, ¶ 11 . ¶7 Olson urges this Court to excuse his failure to object to the registration requirement during sentencing pursuant to either State v. Lenihan (1979), 184 Mont. 338 , 602 P.2d 997 or State v. Finley (1996), 276 Mont. 126 , 915 P.2d 208 , abrogated in part on other grounds by State v. Gallagher, 2001 MT 39 , & 21, 304 Mont. 215 , & 21, 19 P.3d 817 , & 21. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Smith v. Doe
green
2 sentences2005We concluded that the registration requirement was nonpunitive after applying the test articulated by the United States Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe (2003), 538 U.S. 84 , 123 S.Ct. 1140 , 155 L.E.2d 164 . 2005We concluded that the registration requirement was nonpunitive after applying the test articulated by the United States Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe (2003), 538 U.S. 84 , 123 S.Ct. 1140 , 155 L.E.2d 164 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Minez
green
2 sentences2005State v. Minez, 2003 MT 344, ¶ 33 , 318 Mont. 478, ¶ 33 , 82 P.3d 1, ¶ 33 . 2005State v. Minez, 2003 MT 344, ¶ 33 , 318 Mont. 478, ¶ 33 , 82 P.3d 1, ¶ 33 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
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.