State v. Baertsch

Baertsch, 2025 MT 143 (Mont. 2025) · Supreme Court of Montana · July 8, 2025 · No. DA 23-0180

Summary

This Montana Supreme Court opinion addresses whether sufficient evidence supported a defendant’s burglary conviction predicated on disorderly conduct committed inside the victim’s home. The court analyzes the statutory elements of burglary and disorderly conduct, concluding that while profane language can satisfy the predicate offense, disturbing the peace requires a public component that is absent in purely private domestic disputes. Consequently, the court vacates the burglary conviction due to insufficient evidence and declines to address the defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

Court
Supreme Court of Montana
Writing for the Court
Katherine M. Bidegaray; Ingrid Gustafson; Laurie McKinnon; James Jeremiah Shea; Beth Baker; Cory J. Swanson; Jim Rice
Jurisdiction
Montana
Decision date
July 8, 2025
Docket number
DA 23-0180
Procedural posture
Appeal from conviction and sentence in the District Court of the First Judicial District, Lewis and Clark County.
Standard of review
De novo for sufficiency of the evidence and for legality of the sentencing condition.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Baertsch v. State
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

criminal proceduresentencingdue process

Practice areas

criminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether sufficient evidence supported the burglary conviction with disorderly conduct as the predicate offense.
  2. Whether the district court illegally imposed a seven‑year restriction on Baertsch’s right to seek early termination of his sentence.

Holdings

  1. The conviction was not supported by sufficient evidence; the burglary conviction is vacated.
  2. The seven‑year restriction is illegal; the case is remanded for the condition to be struck.

Key quotations

We hold that, even viewing the trial evidence in a light most favorable to the State, there was not sufficient evidence upon which a rational juror could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Baertsch committed burglary with the predicate offense of disorderly conduct. (¶41)
We hold that the District Court was not authorized to impose such a restriction on Baertsch’s right to seek early termination of his sentence. (¶40)

Factual background

On May 21, 2020, Baertsch and his girlfriend argued, and Baertsch later forced entry into K.W.'s home by kicking in the front door, used profane language, and fled. K.W. testified about the confrontation and the language used.

Procedural history

Baertsch was convicted in January 2023 of burglary with disorderly conduct, partner or family member assault, and criminal mischief, and sentenced to consecutive suspended terms with a seven‑year restriction on early termination. He appealed the burglary conviction and the sentencing condition.

Remand instructions

Strike the illegal seven‑year restriction on early termination of the suspended sentence.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…