State v. Sherman

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed the District Court’s judgment in Shane Sherman’s misdemeanor DUI case. The Court held that trial before a non-lawyer justice of the peace, without a trial de novo appeal, did not violate Sherman’s constitutional rights to due process or effective assistance of counsel, and it issued the decision as a noncitable memorandum opinion.

Holdings

1. Trial before a non-lawyer justice of the peace, even when a trial de novo is unavailable on appeal, did not violate Sherman's constitutional rights to due process or effective assistance of counsel.
2. The District Court's decision and order affirming the Justice Court's judgment and sentence was affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial of a jailable misdemeanor before a non-lawyer justice of the peace, without the availability of a trial de novo on appeal, violated Sherman's constitutional rights to due process or effective assistance of counsel.
2. Whether the failure to record large portions of the Justice Court trial required dismissal with prejudice.

Disposition

affirmed