Notes of Decisions
Cited in
18
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case:
State v. Hamilton, 2018 MT 253, 428 P.3d 849.
State v. Hamilton, 2018 MT 253, 428 P.3d 849.
· cites it 14× “Instead, Hamilton appeals his sentence under two theories: (1) that the District Court failed-as required by § 46-18-223, MCA -to find by a preponderance of the evidence whether an exception to his sentence applied and to state its reasons in writing; and (2) that the District…”
State v. Zabawa, 928 P.2d 151 (Mont. 1996).
· cites it 14× “NELSON, Justice, specially concurs. I agree with Justice Leaphart's position that we are not bound to interpret Montana's Constitution in the same fashion that the United States Supreme Court has interpreted similar or identical counterparts in the federal constitution.”
State v. Hubbard, 649 P.2d 1331 (Mont. 1982).
· cites it 6× “Such a hearing as was held here is required by section 46-18-223, MCA, which provides in part: " Hearing to determine application of exceptions.”
State v. Keith, 2000 MT 23, 995 P.2d 966.
· cites it 12× “Citing § 46-18-223,MCA, Keith argues that when the application of an exception provided for in § 46-18-222, MCA, is an issue, the court shall grant the defendant a hearing prior to the imposition of sentence to determine the applicability of the exception.”
State v. Baker, 901 P.2d 54 (Mont. 1995).
· cites it 4× “Baker argues that counsel failed to request a hearing pursuant to § 46-18-223, MCA, on whether the mandatory minimum sentence should apply to him (Baker’s issues 17 and 22).”
State v. Tucker, 2000 MT 255, 10 P.3d 832.
· cites it 17× “Did the District Court fail to adequately comply with § 46-18-223(3), MCA, by not stating its reasons why it chose not to apply one of the § 46-18-222(3), MCA, exception to the § 46-18-221, MCA, weapons enhancement statute? FACTUAL BACKGROUND ¶3 Tucker arrived in Helena after a…”
State v. Arlington, 875 P.2d 307 (Mont. 1994).
· cites it 2× “In this case, the District Court did conduct a hearing under § 46-18-223, MCA, to determine if the argued exceptions, subsections (2) and (3) of § 46-18-222, MCA, applied.”
State v. Zampich, 667 P.2d 955 (Mont. 1983).
· cites it 6× “All mandatory minimum sentences prescribed by the laws of this state .”
State v. Sprinkle, 2000 MT 188, 4 P.3d 1204.
· cites it 7× “¶10 Section 46-18-223, MCA, provides: (1) When the application of an exception provided for in 46-18-222 is an issue, the court shall grant the defendant a hearing prior to the imposition of sentence to determine the applicability of the exception.”
State v. Graveley, 915 P.2d 184 (Mont. 1996).
· cites it 4× “The Court ignores the fact that, pursuant to § 46-18-223, MCA, the sentencing judge "considered the exception to the mandatory minimum in this case and I find that they do not apply for the following reasons.”
State v. Goodwin, 679 P.2d 231 (Mont. 1984).
· cites it 6× “Section 46-18-223, MCA sets forth the procedures and standards for determining the applicability of exceptions to mandatory minimum sentences.”
Hans v. State, 942 P.2d 674 (Mont. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Defense counsel argued that Hans should be sentenced as a mentally ill person under §§ 46-14-311 and 46-14-312, MCA, and that the mandatory mínimums should not be considered pursuant to § 46-18-223, MCA. The District Court found that the provisions of § 46-14-311, MCA, were not…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-223(1): 4 cases
State v. Hamilton, 2018 MT 253, 428 P.3d 849.
“Instead, Hamilton appeals his sentence under two theories: (1) that the District Court failed-as required by § 46-18-223, MCA -to find by a preponderance of the evidence whether an exception to his sentence applied and to state its reasons in writing; and (2) that the District…”
Mont. Code Ann. § 46-18-223(3): 7 cases
State v. Zabawa, 928 P.2d 151 (Mont. 1996).
“NELSON, Justice, specially concurs. I agree with Justice Leaphart's position that we are not bound to interpret Montana's Constitution in the same fashion that the United States Supreme Court has interpreted similar or identical counterparts in the federal constitution.”
State v. Hamilton, 2018 MT 253, 428 P.3d 849.
“Instead, Hamilton appeals his sentence under two theories: (1) that the District Court failed-as required by § 46-18-223, MCA -to find by a preponderance of the evidence whether an exception to his sentence applied and to state its reasons in writing; and (2) that the District…”
State v. Tucker, 2000 MT 255, 10 P.3d 832.
“Did the District Court fail to adequately comply with § 46-18-223(3), MCA, by not stating its reasons why it chose not to apply one of the § 46-18-222(3), MCA, exception to the § 46-18-221, MCA, weapons enhancement statute? FACTUAL BACKGROUND ¶3 Tucker arrived in Helena after a…”
State v. Goodwin, 679 P.2d 231 (Mont. 1984).
“Section 46-18-223, MCA sets forth the procedures and standards for determining the applicability of exceptions to mandatory minimum sentences.”
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.