Notes of Decisions
State v. Lester Kills on Top, 787 P.2d 336 (Mont. 1990).
· cites it 14× “The statute governing State jurisdiction for a criminal offense is § 46-2-101, MCA, which provides in pertinent part: (1) A person is subject to prosecution in this state for an offense which he commits while either within or outside the state by his own conduct or that of…”
State v. White, 750 P.2d 440 (Mont. 1988).
· cites it 27× “Did the District Court have jurisdiction over the offense? Section 46-2-101, MCA, sets forth the scope of Montana courts' jurisdiction: A person is subject to prosecution in this state for an offense which he commits while either within or outside the state by his own conduct or…”
State v. Speaker, 2000 MT 152 (Mont. 2000).
· cites it 14× “Accordingly, Eagle Speaker’s subsequent transportation of the allegedly stolen property off of the Reservation would not subject him to prosecution in the district courts of Montana under § 46-2-101, MCA. The State has not persuaded us that the reasoning of Mullin should not…”
State v. Ray, 882 P.2d 1013 (Mont. 1994).
· cites it 6× “" Section 46-2-101(1)(c), MCA; Ray was not charged with nor was he prosecuted for the actual sexual assaults in the state of Idaho; any such prosecution would, necessarily, have to be conducted in that state.”
State v. Bush, 636 P.2d 849 (Mont. 1981).
· cites it 6× “If this *478 were done, the remaining evidence would show only that appellant hired Kohse for a job in Los Angeles, and this would be insufficient evidence to support jurisdiction over the case in Montana under section 46-2-101, MCA. We find that the evidence of the events…”
State v. Redcrow, 1999 MT 95 (Mont. 1999).
· cites it 2× “¶29 We agree with the District Court that pursuant to the definition of “conviction” in § 46-2-101(15), MCA (1987), Redcrow was convicted when her jury rendered a verdict of guilty in February 1988, and the District Court imposed her sentence in October 1988.”
State v. C. L. Levine, 2024 MT 169 (Mont. 2024).
· cites it 2× “The jurisdictional requirements to prosecute Levine in Montana are found in § 46-2-101, MCA, and the allegations against him fall squarely within that statute, regardless of his New Mexico residency.”
State v. W. Lamoureux, 2021 MT 94 (Mont. 2021).
· cites it 6× “To establish jurisdiction, the State had to prove either the conduct or result proscribed by § 45-8-213(1)(a), MCA, occurred in Montana.”
State v. Matthews, 600 P.2d 188 (Mont. 1979).
· cites it 3× “Finally, section 46-2-101, MCA, confers jurisdiction upon state courts in general when the offense charged is committed within the state.”
City of Helena v. Frankforter, 423 P.3d 581 (Mont. 2018).
· cites it 3× “" Section 46-2-101(1)(a), MCA. District courts have jurisdiction "of all public offenses not otherwise provided for.”
Maffit v. City of Helena, 2021 MT 14 (Mont. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Pursuant to § 46-2-101(2), MCA, an “aggrieved party” is “a person .”
Jordan v. Kalin, 2011 MT 142 (Mont. 2011).
· cites it 3× “Section 46-2-101(l)(a), MCA, provides that “[a] person is subject to prosecution in this state for an offense that the person commits while either within or outside the state .”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(1) — 1 case
State v. Speaker, 2000 MT 152 (Mont. 2000).
“Accordingly, Eagle Speaker’s subsequent transportation of the allegedly stolen property off of the Reservation would not subject him to prosecution in the district courts of Montana under § 46-2-101, MCA. The State has not persuaded us that the reasoning of Mullin should not…”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(1)(a) — 5 cases
State v. White, 750 P.2d 440 (Mont. 1988).
“Did the District Court have jurisdiction over the offense? Section 46-2-101, MCA, sets forth the scope of Montana courts' jurisdiction: A person is subject to prosecution in this state for an offense which he commits while either within or outside the state by his own conduct or…”
State v. Speaker, 2000 MT 152 (Mont. 2000).
“Accordingly, Eagle Speaker’s subsequent transportation of the allegedly stolen property off of the Reservation would not subject him to prosecution in the district courts of Montana under § 46-2-101, MCA. The State has not persuaded us that the reasoning of Mullin should not…”
City of Helena v. Frankforter, 423 P.3d 581 (Mont. 2018).
“" Section 46-2-101(1)(a), MCA. District courts have jurisdiction "of all public offenses not otherwise provided for.”
State v. W. Lamoureux, 2021 MT 94 (Mont. 2021).
“To establish jurisdiction, the State had to prove either the conduct or result proscribed by § 45-8-213(1)(a), MCA, occurred in Montana.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(1)(c) — 1 case
State v. Ray, 882 P.2d 1013 (Mont. 1994).
“" Section 46-2-101(1)(c), MCA; Ray was not charged with nor was he prosecuted for the actual sexual assaults in the state of Idaho; any such prosecution would, necessarily, have to be conducted in that state.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(15) — 1 case
State v. Redcrow, 1999 MT 95 (Mont. 1999).
“¶29 We agree with the District Court that pursuant to the definition of “conviction” in § 46-2-101(15), MCA (1987), Redcrow was convicted when her jury rendered a verdict of guilty in February 1988, and the District Court imposed her sentence in October 1988.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(2) — 5 cases
State v. White, 750 P.2d 440 (Mont. 1988).
“Did the District Court have jurisdiction over the offense? Section 46-2-101, MCA, sets forth the scope of Montana courts' jurisdiction: A person is subject to prosecution in this state for an offense which he commits while either within or outside the state by his own conduct or…”
State v. Speaker, 2000 MT 152 (Mont. 2000).
“Accordingly, Eagle Speaker’s subsequent transportation of the allegedly stolen property off of the Reservation would not subject him to prosecution in the district courts of Montana under § 46-2-101, MCA. The State has not persuaded us that the reasoning of Mullin should not…”
State v. W. Lamoureux, 2021 MT 94 (Mont. 2021).
“To establish jurisdiction, the State had to prove either the conduct or result proscribed by § 45-8-213(1)(a), MCA, occurred in Montana.”
Maffit v. City of Helena, 2021 MT 14 (Mont. 2021).
“Pursuant to § 46-2-101(2), MCA, an “aggrieved party” is “a person .”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(l)(a) — 1 case
Jordan v. Kalin, 2011 MT 142 (Mont. 2011).
“Section 46-2-101(l)(a), MCA, provides that “[a] person is subject to prosecution in this state for an offense that the person commits while either within or outside the state .”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(l)(c) — 1 case
State v. Ray, 882 P.2d 1013 (Mont. 1994).
“" Section 46-2-101(1)(c), MCA; Ray was not charged with nor was he prosecuted for the actual sexual assaults in the state of Idaho; any such prosecution would, necessarily, have to be conducted in that state.”
— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-2-101(lXc) — 1 case
State v. Bush, 636 P.2d 849 (Mont. 1981).
“If this *478 were done, the remaining evidence would show only that appellant hired Kohse for a job in Los Angeles, and this would be insufficient evidence to support jurisdiction over the case in Montana under section 46-2-101, MCA. We find that the evidence of the events…”
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.