State v. Otto

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Chris Otto's motion to dismiss a felony DUI charge enhanced based on three prior DUI-related convictions. The court held that Montana's statutory plea advisement requirements were satisfied and that prior decisions did not require advisement of additional rights, such as the right to appeal, the right to a speedy and public trial, or the right to object to unlawfully obtained evidence.

Holdings

1. Section 46-12-210, MCA, requires the court to determine that a defendant understands the rights listed in the statute before accepting a guilty or nolo contendere plea; it does not require advisement of a right to appeal, a right to a speedy and public trial, or a right to object to evidence obtained in violation of law.
2. Otto's three prior DUI-related convictions supported enhancement of his subsequent DUI offense to a felony because he had been advised of all rights required by § 46-12-210, MCA.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Otto's three prior DUI-related convictions supported enhancement of his most recent DUI offense to a felony.
2. Whether Montana law or the Montana Constitution required guilty-plea defendants to be advised of a right to appeal, a right to a speedy and public trial, and a right to object to evidence obtained in violation of law before the convictions could be used for DUI enhancement.
3. Whether language in State v. Knox describing those additional rights was part of the holding or merely dicta.

Disposition

affirmed