State v. Birthmark

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed Michael Todd Birthmark’s felony conviction for Partner or Family Member Assault. The court held that the jury was properly instructed on the purposeful and knowing mental states required under Montana law and rejected the ineffective-assistance and plain-error claims. The court remanded solely to correct the written judgment by removing conditions concerning parole or conditional release.

Holdings

1. For PFMA under § 45-5-206(1)(c), MCA, the State need prove that the defendant acted purposely or knowingly with respect to his conduct; it need not prove that the defendant intended to cause the victim to experience reasonable apprehension of bodily injury. The reasonable-apprehension element is determined objectively from the victim’s circumstances and perceptions.
2. Birthmark failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel because the challenged instructions were proper and the record did not demonstrate deficient performance.
3. Plain-error review was unwarranted because the jury instructions were legally correct and therefore no trial error existed.
4. The written judgment had to be corrected because the District Court could not impose terms and conditions governing parole or conditional release.

Questions Presented

1. Whether trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to the mental-state jury instructions for felony Partner or Family Member Assault.
2. Whether the Supreme Court should exercise plain-error review over the unobjected-to mental-state jury instructions.
3. Whether the written judgment improperly imposed terms and conditions applicable during parole or conditional release and therefore required correction.

Disposition

remanded