State v. Donald Wayne Pulst

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court reviewed Donald Wayne Pulst’s convictions for sexual assault, sexual intercourse without consent, and indecent exposure. The court upheld the admission of limited evidence concerning an uncharged assault and the exclusion of evidence of possible later physical abuse of a witness. It reversed and remanded only to correct written sentencing conditions that were inconsistent with the orally pronounced sentence.

Holdings

1. The District Court did not abuse its discretion by admitting limited evidence of the Washington assault to explain the timing and circumstances of A.B.'s disclosure, while restricting the details and instructing the jury on the evidence's limited use.
2. The District Court did not abuse its discretion by excluding evidence of bruises observed on K.S. years later and testimony speculating that her husband caused them.
3. The oral pronouncement of sentence in the defendant's presence is the legally effective sentence and final judgment; a written judgment may not increase or materially alter that sentence. Conditions 4, 7, and 25 of Pulst's written judgment were inconsistent with the oral sentence and had to be corrected.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the District Court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of an uncharged Washington sexual assault.
2. Whether the District Court abused its discretion by excluding evidence of possible physical abuse of K.S. by her husband several years after the alleged sexual assaults.
3. Whether the District Court erred by entering a written sentence inconsistent with the sentence orally pronounced in the defendant's presence.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded