State of Montana v. J. C.

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed J.C.'s conviction and sentence for felony incest. The court rejected claims of ineffective assistance of counsel based on trial strategy, declined to consider record-extrinsic ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal, upheld the admission of sentencing testimony, and determined that the sentence was not improperly increased based on J.C.'s failure to admit guilt. The court also declined to review unpreserved objections to the presentence investigation and psychosexual evaluation and upheld reimbursement for appointed-counsel costs.

Holdings

1. Counsel's questioning of R.C. about whether he had been influenced or coached was a reasonable trial-strategy decision within the range of competent professional performance and did not constitute ineffective assistance.
2. The court would not decide an ineffective-assistance claim that depended on documents and facts outside the appellate record; such a claim is more appropriately raised in a petition for postconviction relief.
3. The District Court did not err by allowing the counselor to testify at sentencing concerning the prior psychosexual evaluation and J.C.'s prior criminal-history statement.
4. The District Court did not impose a harsher sentence in violation of Montana law by considering J.C.'s lack of responsibility or remorse; the record showed that the sentence was based on numerous competent factors rather than principally on his silence or refusal to admit guilt.
5. The court would not consider J.C.'s challenges to the PSI or the therapist's qualifications because he did not object in the District Court.
6. The District Court properly ordered J.C. to reimburse $1,736 in court-appointed counsel fees.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel was ineffective for challenging R.C.'s credibility regarding a change in testimony and for failing to present evidence concerning J.C.'s alleged mental impairment.
2. Whether the District Court erred by permitting a counselor to testify at sentencing concerning a psychosexual evaluation conducted in another proceeding.
3. Whether the District Court increased J.C.'s sentence because he failed to admit guilt or show remorse.
4. Whether J.C.'s failure to object in the District Court to the PSI and psychosexual evaluation barred appellate review.
5. Whether the District Court erred by ordering reimbursement of court-appointed counsel fees.

Disposition

affirmed