CRABTREE v STATE

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 14962 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1980 CHARLES L. CRABTREE, Petitioner and Respondent, VS. THE STATE OF MONTANA and MARVIN DAGEL, Sheriff, Respondents and Appellants. Appeal from: District Court of the Third Judicial District, Honorable E. Gardner Brownlee, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellants: Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana Chris Tweeten, Assistant Attorney General, argued, Helena, Montana For Respondent: Richardson and Richardson, Butte, Montana William Richardson argued, Butte, Montana Submitted: Decided: January 14, 1980 MAR 10 1w . J u s t i c e J o h n Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f t h e Court. Mr. c his i s a n a p p e a l by t h e S t a t e o f Montana from a n o r d e r of t h e D i s t r i c t Court, Third J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , i n and f o r G r a n i t e County, which r e l e a s e d t h e p e t i t i o n e r , C h a r l e s L. C r a b t r e e , from c u s t o d y o f t h e County S h e r i f f who was h o l d i n g him p u r s u a n t t o a n e x t r a d i t i o n r e q u e s t from t h e S t a t e o f Oregon. The i s s u e b e f o r e t h i s C o u r t i s w h e t h e r t h e t r i a l judge e r r e d i n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e m e r i t s o f t h e Oregon c h a r g e s a g a i n s t C r a b t r e e when d e c i d i n g w h e t h e r o r n o t h e s h o u l d b e e x t r a d i t e d t o t h e S t a t e o f Oregon. The p e t i t i o n e r and h i s w i f e C o r r i n e A . Melton ( C r a b t r e e ) w e r e d i v o r c e d on F e b r u a r y 27, 1970 i n t h e Clackamas County C i r c u i t Court. T h a t c o u r t o r d e r e d p e t i t i o n e r t o pay $225 p e r month f o r t h e s u p p o r t o f t h e p a r t i e s ' three children. The w i f e had d i f f i c u l t y c o l l e c t i n g t h e s u p p o r t payments from the petitioner. I n J u l y 1970, s h e sought t h e a s s i s t a n c e of t h e Clackamas County D i s t r i c t A t t o r n e y i n c o n t a c t i n g t h e p e t i t i o n e r t o c o l l e c t payments. P e t i t i o n e r was l o c a t e d i n P h i l l i p s b u r g , Montana, where h e r e s i d e d . a t e s a l o g g i n g company i n G r a n i t e County. H e owns and o p e r - P e t i t i o n e r agreed t o pay t h e w i f e $150 p e r month f o r c h i l d s u p p p o r t , b u t i n t h e f i r s t t e n months o f 1972, t h e w i f e r e p o r t e d t h a t s h e r e c e i v e d o n l y f i v e s u p p o r t payments. I n September 1973, t h e Clackamas County C i r c u i t C o u r t d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e p e t i t i o n e r was $1500 i n a r r e a r s f o r s u p p o r t payments. I n 1 9 7 5 , a Clackamas County g r a n d j u r y r e t u r n e d a t h r e e c o u n t i n d i c t m e n t f o r nonpayment o f c h i l d s u p p o r t a g a i n s t t h e petitioner. Warrants f o r p e t i t i o n e r ' s arrest w e r e s e n t t o t h e G r a n i t e County S h e r i f f . A l t h o u g h no a r r e s t was made, o n O c t o b e r 31, 1976, t h e G r a n i t e County D i s t r i c t C o u r t e n t e r e d a n o r d e r r e q u i r i n g t h e p e t i t i o n e r t o pay $150 p e r month f o r t h e support of the t h r e e children. P e t i t i o n e r made o n l y t h r e e payments between August 1976 and J a n u a r y 1977, a n d on August 22, 1978, t h e Clackamas County g r a n d j u r y i n d i c t e d t h e p e t i t i o n e r f o r two c o u n t s o f c r i m i n a l n o n s u p p o r t , a c l a s s C f e l o n y i n Oregon. The r e c o r d s o f t h e Clackamas County C i r c u i t C o u r t show t h a t i n 1978 o n l y one payment was r e c e i v e d from t h e p e t i t i o n e r . The Governor o f Oregon s i g n e d a r e q u i s i t i o n s e e k i n g e x t r a d i t i o n o f t h e p e t i t i o n e r t o Oregon f o r a t r i a l i n Clackamas County on two c o u n t s o f c r i m i n a l n o n s u p p o r t . Upon r e c e i p t o f t h e r e q u i s i t i o n , Governor Thomas J u d g e of Montana i s s u e d a w a r r a n t f o r t h e a r r e s t o f p e t i t i o n e r and f o r h i s d e l i v e r a n c e t o t h e a u t h o r i z e d a g e n t o f t h e Governor o f Oregon. P e t i t i o n e r was a r r e s t e d by t h e G r a n i t e County S h e r i f f on A p r i l 1 9 , 1979, and f i l e d a p e t i t i o n w i t h t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i n which he named t h e S t a t e o f Montana a s p l a i n t i f f and h i m s e l f a s d e f e n d a n t , and s o u g h t r e l i e f by means o f a w r i t of habeas corpus. Each p a r t y f i l e d a b r i e f and memoran- dum i n s u p p o r t o f i t s p o s i t i o n , and t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t h e l d a show c a u s e h e a r i n g o n J u l y 24, 1979. The c o u r t ' s o r d e r o f August 7 , 1979 o r d e r e d t h e r e l e a s e o f p e t i t i o n e r from t h e c u s t o d y o f t h e G r a n i t e County S h e r i f f and r e q u i r e d t h e p e t i t i o n e r t o pay $100 p e r month f o r t h e s u p p o r t o f h i s two sons. I t i s from t h i s o r d e r t h a t t h e S t a t e o f Montana appeals. This c a s e involves an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e i n t e r a c t i o n between M o n t a n a ' s Uniform R e c i p r o c a l E n f o r c e m e n t o f S u p p o r t A c t and t h e Uniform C r i m i n a l E x t r a d i t i o n A c t . This appears t o b e a c a s e o f f i r s t i m p r e s s i o n i n Montana. The a p p e l l a n t S t a t e ' s argument i s b a s e d o n i t s cont e n t i o n t h a t t h e e x t r a d i t i o n of p e t i t i o n e r i s f o r a criminal c h a r g e and t h a t a j u d i c i a l r e v i e w o f t h e p r o p r i e t y o f t h e e x t r a d i t i o n o r d e r must b e l i m i t e d t o t h e i n q u i r y p e r m i t t e d by t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t i n t h e c a s e o f Michigan v . Doran ( 1 9 7 8 ) , - U.S. v . Booth ( 1 9 5 8 ) , 134 Mont. (1978) I - Mont. , 99 S.Ct. 530. See a l s o S t a t e 235, 328 P.2d 1104; I n re H a r t 583 P.2d 4 1 1 , 35 St.Rep. 1234. In Doran, t h e p e t i t i o n e r s o u g h t a w r i t o f h a b e a s c o r p u s i n o r d e r t o a v o i d e x t r a d i t i o n f o r c h a r g e s o f t h e f t o f a motor v e h i c l e and t h e f t by embezzlement. The U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e Michigan Supreme C o u r t e r r e d when i t r e v e r s e d t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s d e n i a l of t h e habeas corpus petition. The Doran d e c i s i o n i s b a s e d on t h e C o u r t ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of A r t i c l e I V , S e c t i o n 2 of t h e United S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n which p r o v i d e s : "A P e r s o n c h a r g e d i n a n y S t a t e w i t h T r e a s o n , F e l o n y , o r o t h e r C r i m e , who s h a l l f l e e from J u s t i c e , and b e found i n a n o t h e r S t a t e , s h a l l on Demand o f t h e e x e c u t i v e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e S t a t e from which he f l e d , b e d e l i v e r e d up, t o b e removed t o t h e S t a t e h a v i n g J u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e Crime." The Supreme C o u r t h e l d t h a t A r t i c l e I V , S e c t i o n 2 p r o h i b i t e d c o u r t s i n t h e asylum s t a t e from r e v i e w i n g t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f a n e u t r a l m a g i s t r a t e i n t h e demanding s t a t e t h a t p r o b a b l e c a u s e t o s u p p o r t t h e e x t r a d i t i o n demand e x i s t e d . The C o u r t s t a t e d t h a t o n c e t h e g o v e r n o r o f t h e asylum s t a t e g r a n t e d e x t r a d i t i o n , a c o u r t c o n s i d e r i n g r e l e a s e on h a b e a s c o r p u s c a n d o no more t h a n d e c i d e " ( a ) w h e t h e r t h e e x t r a d i t i o n documents o n t h e i r f a c e a r e i n o r d e r ; ( b ) whether t h e p e t i - t i o n e r h a s been c h a r g e d w i t h a crime i n t h e demanding s t a t e ; ( c ) w h e t h e r t h e p e t i t i o n e r i s t h e p e r s o n named i n t h e req u e s t f o r e x t r a d i t i o n ; and ( d ) w h e t h e r t h e p e t i t i o n e r i s a fugitive." Doran, s u p r a , a t 535. I n t h e p r e s e n t case, Winston L . Bradshaw, p r e s i d i n g judge o f t h e Clackamas County C i r c u i t C o u r t , c e r t i f i e d t h a t h e i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e f a c t s and c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e c a s e , and t h a t t h e m e r i t s of t h e c a s e warrant a p p l i c a t i o n f o r r e q u i s i t i o n . The Governor o f t h e S t a t e o f Montana h a s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e copy o f t h e r e q u i s i t i o n and o t h e r d u l y a u t h e n t i c a t e d p a p e r s f i l e d w i t h t h e demand j u s t i f y t h e e x e r c i s e o f h i s - discretion i n granting extradition. . Therefore, t h e S t a t e a r g u e s t h a t S u r a n , ' s u p r a , l i m i t s t h e i n q u i r y o f t h e Montana c o u r t s t o t h e four p o i n t s s t a t e d within t h e opinion. The p e t i t i o n e r a r g u e s t h a t Duran d o e s n o t a p p l y t o h i s p e t i t i o n b e c a u s e t h e c h a r g e a g a i n s t him i s b a s e d on h i s a l l e g e d f a i l u r e t o comply w i t h t h e c h i l d s u p p o r t o r d e r , which i s c i v i l and n o t c r i m i n a l . H e a n a l o g i z e s h i s d u t y of s u p p o r t t o o t h e r d u t i e s i n v o l v i n g f a m i l y m a t t e r s , s u c h as c u s t o d y matters. H e argues t h a t t h e p e t i t i o n f o r habeas corpus of a c h i l d detained c o n t r a r y t o a custody o r d e r i s t r e a t e d a s a c i v i l m a t t e r , and t h a t t h e c o u r t i n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e m e r i t s of t h e p e t i t i o n has determined t h a t t h e c h i l d i s i l l e g a l l y d e t a i n e d , r e l y i n g upon I n r e Thompson ( 1 9 2 6 ) , 7 7 Mont. 466, 251 P . 163. W e f i n d no m e r i t i n t h i s argument. H e r e the petitioner was i n d i c t e d f o r a c r i m i n a l o f f e n s e , c r i m i n a l n o n s u p p o r t , which i s l i s t e d a s a c l a s s C f e l o n y i n t h e S t a t e o f Oregon. The S t a t e o f Oregon c l e a r l y c o n t e m p l a t e s c r i m i n a l p r o c e e d i n g s against petitioner a s its requisition for extradition stated t h a t he had committed a crime i n t h e S t a t e o f Oregon and t h a t t h e r e was no hope o f s u c c e s s i n i n i t i a t i n g f u r t h e r p r o - c e e d i n g s a g a i n s t him u n d e r URESA. Even t h e p e t i t i o n e r ' s own p e t i t i o n s e e k s r e l e a s e from e x t r a d i t i o n f o r c r i m i n a l c h a r g e s a n d i s c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from c a s e s h e c i t e s where t h e h a b e a s c o r p u s p r o c e e d i n g was d e t e r m i n e d t o be c i v i l . P e t i t i o n e r h a s g i v e n u s no c a s e a u t h o r i t y , n o r d o e s t h e r e a p p e a r t o be a n y r e a s o n from t h o s e c a s e s c i t e d by him f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g ' B a . x i m from t h e p r e s e n t c a s e . W e f i n d t h a t s e c t i o n 46-30-225, MCA, a s w e l l a s t h e $ 0 h o l d i n g o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t i n B u r a n , r e q u i r e C t h e r e v e r s a l o f t h e ~ i s t r i c t o u r t ' s o r d e r g r a n t i n g release of t h e p e t i t i o n e r . The m a t t e r i s r e t u r n e d t o t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t o f G r a n i t e County r e i n s t a t i n g t h e p r o c e e d i n g and g r a n t i n g t h e Oregon r e q u e s t f o r e x t r a d i t i o n . W concur: e a i e f J 4t i c e ~ Ch us CM// a e e . a Justices C/ Mr. J u s t i c e D a n i e l J. Shea w i l l f i l e a n o p i n i o n l a t e r .

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.