Mont. Code Ann. » TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE · CHAPTER 13. PRETRIAL MOTIONS · Part 2. Specific Pretrial Motions
Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 46-13-210 (2026)

Trial Of Indictments, Informations, Complaints, Or Defendants Together

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. MCA Contents
  2. TITLE 46
  3. CHAPTER 13
  4. Part 2
  5. 46-13-210 Trial of indictments, informations, complaints, or defendants together

TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 13. PRETRIAL MOTIONS

Part 2. Specific Pretrial Motions

Trial Of Indictments, Informations, Complaints, Or Defendants Together

46-13-210. Trial of indictments, informations, complaints, or defendants together. The court may order two or more indictments, informations, complaints, or defendants to be tried together if the interests of justice require and the charges or defendants could have been joined in a single indictment, information, or complaint as provided for in 46-11-404.

History: En. Sec. 176, Ch. 800, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 27, Ch. 262, L. 1993.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2000–2018 · leading case: State v. C. Ankeny, 2018 MT 91 (Mont. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. C. Ankeny, 2018 MT 91 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 19× “14 Section 46-13-210, MCA. We have held that, to determine if joinder is in the interest of justice, the district court must weigh the State’s interest in judicial economy against the defendant’s right to a fair trial.”
State v. Enright, 2000 MT 372 (Mont. 2000). · cites it 2× “In addition, § 46-13-210, MCA, provides that “the court may order two or more indictments, informations, complaints, or defendants to be tried together if the interests of justice require .”
State v. C. Ankeny, 2018 MT 91 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 9× “14 Section 46-13-210, MCA. We have held that, to determine if joinder is in the interest of justice, the district court must weigh the State’s interest in judicial economy against the defendant’s right to a fair trial.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.