State v. Violette

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court dismissed without prejudice an interim appeal from an order denying David Violette’s motion to require the State to elect between aggravated assault and elder abuse charges. The court held that Violette’s double-jeopardy claim and reliance on Montana’s multiple-charges statute were premature because jeopardy had not attached before trial. The court remanded the matter to the District Court for trial without deciding whether elder abuse is a specific instance of aggravated assault.

Holdings

1. Violette's claims were premature because jeopardy had not attached; he had not previously been tried for or convicted of the charged offenses.
2. Section 46-11-410(1), MCA, permits prosecution for multiple offenses arising from the same transaction, while the restrictions in § 46-11-410(2), MCA, concern multiple convictions; therefore, Violette's reliance on subsection (2) was premature.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Violette could obtain interlocutory appellate review of his claim that prosecuting him for both aggravated assault and elder abuse would violate double-jeopardy protections or Montana's multiple-charges statute before he had been tried or convicted.
2. Whether the Montana Supreme Court should decide at that stage whether elder abuse is a specific instance of aggravated assault under § 46-11-410(2)(d), MCA.

Disposition

dismissed