State v. Michael Howard Moullet

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court affirmed Michael Howard Moullet’s burglary conviction based on his alleged intent to commit custodial interference. The Court held that the charging documents sufficiently established probable cause and that the statutory defense for custodial interference did not apply because Moullet was charged with burglary, not custodial interference. The opinion is a noncitable memorandum decision.

Holdings

1. The amended information and amended affidavit established more than a mere probability that Moullet committed burglary with the intent to commit custodial interference, and therefore supported probable cause.
2. The State was not required to allege facts identifying possible defenses specified in Section 45-5-304(3), MCA, because Moullet was charged with burglary, not custodial interference.
3. The State did not need to prove that custodial interference was actually committed; proof of the intent to commit that offense upon unlawful entry was sufficient for burglary.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the amended charging documents sufficiently established probable cause for burglary based on an intent to commit custodial interference.
2. Whether the State was required to allege facts negating the statutory defense or escape clause in Section 45-5-304(3), MCA, including whether Moullet was a first offender, intended not to return the children, or intended to retain them for a particular period.
3. Whether the defense in Section 45-5-304(3), MCA, applies to a defendant charged with burglary rather than custodial interference.

Disposition

affirmed