STATE v KLEMANN
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 80-336 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1981 THE STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Respondent, VS. JOHN KLEMANN, Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from: District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District, In and for the County of Yellowstone. Honorable Charles Luedke, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Moses Law Firm, Billings, Montana r For Respondent: Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana Harold F. Hanser, County Attorney, Billings, Montana Submitted on briefs: June 24, Decided: ()CT Filed: o@T 6 ,3k' ". fl " Clerk 1981 7 18 91 Mr. J u s t i c e Fred J . Weber d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e C o u r t . ~ ee n d a n t , John Klemann, was found g u i l t y of a g g r a v a t e d f a s s a u l t by a j u r y i n t h e Yellowstone County D i s t r i c t C o u r t and s e n t e n c e d t o s e r v e 1 2 y e a r s i n p r i s o n . Defendant c l a i m s f i r s t t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r o n e o u s l y d e n i e d h i s motion f o r a one week c o n t i n u a n c e of t h e t r i a l d a t e , and second, t h a t an aggravated a s s a u l t conviction i s n o t j u s t i f i e d . W e a f f i r m t h e D i s t r i c t Court. W w i l l f i r s t d i s c u s s d e f e n d a n t ' s motion f o r a o n e e week c o n t i n u a n c e . The o f f e n s e took p l a c e on March 1 5 , 1980. The i n f o r m a t i o n was f i l e d on March 20, f o l l o w e d by d e f e n d a n t ' s n o t g u i l t y p l e a on March 25, 1980. The c a s e was s e t f o r j u r y t r i a l on A p r i l 28, 1980, and was s u b s e q u e n t l y r e s e t t o J u n e 9, 1980, and t h e n t o J u n e 1 6 , 1980, t h e n t o J u n e 1 9 , 1980, t h e d a t e on which t r i a l commenced. On t h e morning of t h e t r i a l , a f t e r t h e j u r y had been c a l l e d , t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s c o u r t - a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l moved t h e c o u r t f o r a c o n t i n u a n c e o f t h e c a s e b a s e d on t h e f a c t t h a t d e f e n d a n t had e v i d e n c e d i n t h e l a s t c o u p l e of d a y s t h a t he was n o t c e r t a i n t h a t h i s a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l would b e a b l e t o h e l p him i n t h e c o u r s e of t h e t r i a l , t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t had e v i d e n c e d t h a t h i s mother had i n d i c a t e d s h e was g o i n g " t o t r y t o o b t a i n p r i v a t e c o u n s e l " f o r him, and f o r t h e r e a s o n t h a t d e f e n d a n t wanted f u r t h e r t i m e i n which t o c o n s i d e r a n o f f e r by t h e S t a t e under which i f d e f e n d a n t p l e a d g u i l t y t h e S t a t e would recommend a s e n t e n c e of 5 y e a r s w i t h a l l b u t one y e a r suspended. of one week. Defendant's counsel requested a continuance The p r o s e c u t i o n reviewed f o r t h e c o u r t t h e v a r i o u s a c t i v i t i e s which had o c c u r r e d s i n c e t h e commission of t h e a l l e g e d o f f e n s e . N a d d i t i o n a l f a c t s were p r e s e n t e d . o The c o u r t d e n i e d t h e motion, and t h e n h e a r d t h e comments of t h e d e f e n d a n t . The d e f e n d a n t s t a t e d t h a t he wanted a d i f f e r e n t lawyer b e c a u s e h i s a t t o r n e y had been up t o s e e him o n l y f i v e o r s i x t i m e s w h i l e he had been i n j a i l , and t h a t he had n o t t a l k e d w i t h him f o r more t h a n a t o t a l of two h o u r s . He a l s o complained t h a t h i s a t t o r n e y had t o l d him t h a t i f he d i d go t o t r i a l , h e would b e c o n v i c t e d b e c a u s e he ( t h e a t t o r n e y ) c o u l d n ' t do a n y t h i n g a b o u t i t . The c o u r t responded by p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t i t was t h e t a s k of h i s c o u n s e l t o g i v e an h o n e s t a p p r a i s a l of t h e e v i d e n c e and p r o b a b l e r e s u l t s . Defendant f u r t h e r s a i d , "My mother h a s t o l d me t h a t s h e ' l l g e t a n o t h e r lawyer f o r m e . " The c o u r t r e p l i e d t h a t t h e c a s e h a s been pending f o r t h r e e months and t h a t t h e j u r y was i n t h e courtroom w a i t i n g f o r him t o be t r i e d . I' The d e f e n d a n t t h e n a s k e d , [ w l h a t i f I waive r i g h t t o f a s t and speedy t r i a l ? " The c o u r t a g a i n answered t h a t when everyone i s r e a d y f o r t r i a l , t h e d e f e n d a n t c o u l d n ' t come i n and s a y he d o e s n ' t want t o go to trial. W n o t e t h a t p r e p a r a t i o n of t h e c a s e f o r t r i a l by e t h e S t a t e had i n c l u d e d b r i n g i n g t h e v i c t i m from C a l i f o r n i a t o testify. The c a s e proceeded t o t r i a l and was completed on t h e f o l l o w i n g day. W have reviewed t h e t r a n s c r i p t and i t e d i s c l o s e s a d e q u a t e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n by t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s a p p o i n t e d c o u n s e l d u r i n g t h e p r e t r i a l , t r i a l and p o s t - t r i a l the case. p h a s e s of The t r a n s c r i p t d o e s n o t show a r e a s o n a b l e f a c t u a l b a s i s t o s u g g e s t t h a t any r i g h t of t h e d e f e n d a n t was d e n i e d by t h e d e n i a l of t h e motion f o r c o n t i n u a n c e . The c o n t r o l l i n g s t a t u t e i s s e c t i o n 46-13-202, MCA, which s t a t e s : 'I (1) The d e f e n d a n t o r t h e s t a t e may move f o r a continuance. I f t h e motion i s made more t h a n 30 d a y s a f t e r a r r a i g n m e n t o r a t any t i m e a £ t e r t r i a l h a s begun, t h e c o u r t may r e q u i r e t h a t i t be s u p p o r t e d by a f f i d a v i t . I' ( 2 ) The c o u r t may upon t h e motion of e i t h e r p a r t y o r upon t h e c o u r t ' s own motion o r d e r a c o n t i n u a n c e i f t h e i n t e r e s t s of j u s t i c e s o r e quire. " ( 3 ) A l l motions f o r c o n t i n u a n c e a r e a d d r e s s e d t o t h e d i s c r e t i o n of t h e t r i a l c o u r t and s h a l l b e c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e l i g h t of t h e d i l i g e n c e shown on t h e p a r t of t h e movant. T h i s s e c t i o n s h a l l be c o n s t r u e d t o t h e end t h a t c r i m i n a l c a s e s a r e t r i e d w i t h due d i l i g e n c e c o n s o n a n t w i t h t h e r i g h t s of t h e d e f e n d a n t and t h e s t a t e t o a speedy t r i a l . " S u b s e c t i o n ( 3 ) s t a t e s t h a t motions f o r c o n t i n u a n c e a r e a d d r e s s e d t o t h e d i s c r e t i o n of t h e t r i a l c o u r t and s h a l l be c o n s i d e r e d i n l i g h t of t h e d i l i g e n c e shown on t h e p a r t of t h e movant. B e f o r e a motion f o r a c o n t i n u a n c e i s g r a n t e d , t h e movant must show t h a t he h a s employed due d i l i g e n c e t o p r o c u r e t h a t which h e now r e q u e s t s a d d i t i o n a l t i m e t o p r o c u r e . v. Kuilman ( 1 9 4 1 ) , 1 1 Mont. 459, 1 1 0 P.2d 969. 1 State The f a c t s s u p p o r t t h e d e n i a l of t h e motion by t h e c o u r t i n o r d e r t h a t t h e c a s e be t r i e d i n a manner c o n s o n a n t w i t h t h e r i g h t s of b o t h t h e d e f e n d a n t and t h e S t a t e t o a speedy t r i a l . Waiting u n t i l t h e day of t r i a l t o make such a motion d o e s n o t show d i l i g e n c e on t h e p a r t of t h e d e f e n d a n t . The c a s e had p r e v i o u s l y been s e t f o r t r i a l . on two o c c a s i o n s , which s h o u l d have b r o u g h t i n t o f o c u s t h e c o n c e r n s of t h e d e f e n d a n t . Defendant u t t e r l y f a i l e d t o show a n a t t e m p t o r a c a p a c i t y t o o b t a i n p r i v a t e counsel. There i s a t o t a l a b s e n c e of a showing t h a t d e f e n d a n t would have been i n a n improved p o s i t i o n had a c o n t i n u a n c e of one week been g r a n t e d . A s u b s t i t u t i o n of a t t o r n e y f o r p u r p o s e s of a p p e a l was n o t i n f a c t made f o r t h e d e f e n d a n t u n t i l December17,1980, s i x months a f t e r t h e t r i a l . This does n o t i n d i c a t e any c a p a c i t y t o c u r e t h e problem w i t h i n t h e one week f o l l o w i n g J u n e 19. The r u l e r e g a r d i n g c o n t i n u a n c e i n c r i m i n a l m a t t e r s i s w e l l s t a t e d i n S t a t e v. K i r k l a n d ( 1 9 7 9 ) , P.2d 586, 590, 36 St.Rep. Mont. - -1 -, 602 1963, 19671 where t h e c o u r t s t a t e d : "'Motions f o r continuance a r e addressed t o t h e d i s c r e t i o n of t h e t r i a l c o u r t and t h e g r a n t i n g of a c o n t i n u a n c e h a s n e v e r been a m a t t e r of r i g h t . ( C i t a t i o n o m i t t e d . ) The d i s t r i c t c o u r t c a n n o t be o v e r t u r n e d on a p p e a l i n a b s e n c e of a showing of p r e j u d i c e t o t h e movant. ( C i t a t i o n o m i t t e d . ) " ' D e f e n d a n t ' s argument t h e r e f o r e must s t a n d o r f a l l on t h e i s s u e of p r e j u d i c e , f o r t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t c a n be s a i d t o have abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n o n l y i f i t s r u l i n g was p r e j u d i c i a l . W e have n o t found a s i n g l e i n which t h e d e n i a l of a motion f o r case a c o n t i n u a n c e was r e v e r s e d w i t h o u t a showing of r e s u l t i n g p r e j u d i c e t o t h e movant. ' S t a t e v. P a u l s o n ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 167 Mont. 310, 538 P.2d 339." . .. The s t a t e m e n t s of d e f e n d a n t ' s c o u n s e l and t h e d e f e n d a n t ' s s t a t e m e n t s t h e m s e l v e s do n o t show any p r e j u d i c e . d o e s n o t d i s c l o s e any p r e j u d i c e . The r e c o r d There a p p e a r s no b a s i s f o r a r e v e r s a l on t h i s ground under t h e d e c i s i o n s of t h i s C o u r t . Such d e c i s i o n s a p p e a r c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e h o l d i n g of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t i n Ungar v . S a r a f i t e (1964) , 376 U.S. 575, 589, 1 L.Ed.2d 1 921, 931, 84 S.Ct. 841, 850, i n which t h e C o u r t s a i d : " T h e r e a r e no mechanical tests f o r d e c i d i n g when a d e n i a l of a c o n t i n u a n c e i s s o a r b i t r a r y a s t o v i o l a t e due p r o c e s s . The answer must be found i n t h e circumstances p r e s e n t i n every case, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e r e a s o n s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e t r i a l judge a t t h e time t h e r e q u e s t i s denied." The c i r c u m s t a n c e s and t h e r e a s o n s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o t a l l y f a i l t o j u s t i f y a c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e d e n i a l of a motion f o r c o n t i n u a n c e was a r b i t r a r y . W e affirm the t r i a l c o u r t ' s d e n i a l of t h e motion. W e n e x t consider i f an aggravated a s s a u l t conviction was j u s t i f i e d . The r e c o r d c o n t a i n s e x t e n s i v e e v i d e n c e w i t h r e g a r d t o e v e n t s p r i o r t o t h e a c t u a l a s s a u l t which w e do n o t deem i t n e c e s s a r y t o s e t o u t i n d e t a i l . The v i c t i m was a 19- y e a r - o l d f e m a l e , 5 ' 6 " t a l l and weighing 105 pounds. The v i c t i m had m e t t h e d e f e n d a n t o n l y a few m i n u t e s b e f o r e t h e t i m e of t h e a s s a u l t . a couch. They were s i t t i n g i n a l i v i n g room on The d e f e n d a n t was s i t t i n g a f e w f e e t from t h e victim. They t a l k e d f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y f o u r m i n u t e s , a f t e r which t h e d e f e n d a n t made a n advance toward t h e v i c t i m and s t a r t e d t o g r a b and p u l l h e r towards him. The v i c t i m s a i d : "Excuse me, I ' m n o t i n t o t h a t and I d o n ' t need a n y t h i n g l i k e that." The d e f e n d a n t t h e n s a t back and resumed t a l k i n g . A f t e r a s h o r t a d d i t i o n a l t i m e , d e f e n d a n t a g a i n came toward t h e v i c t i m and t r i e d t o p u l l h e r t o him and k i s s h e r . v i c t i m t e s t i f i e d t h a t s h e s t o o d up and s a i d : think you'd b e t t e r leave." The "Excuse me, I The d e f e n d a n t t h e n r e a c h e d up, grabbed t h e v i c t i m and t h r e w h e r o n t o a couch. While s h e was l y i n g on t h e couch, he h i t h e r on t h e head w i t h a g l a s s ashtray. H e - h i t h e r on t h e s i d e of t h e head a b o u t f i v e t i m e s . She began screaming w h i l e t h e d e f e n d a n t t r i e d t o r o l l h e r over. Another p e r s o n t h e n banged on t h e a p a r t m e n t d o o r , s e e k i n g a d m i t t a n c e , and t h e a s s a u l t t e r m i n a t e d . The e v i d e n c e showed t h a t t h e a s h t r a y w i t h which t h e d e f e n d a n t s t r u c k t h e v i c t i m weighed a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 1 / 2 pounds, was s q u a r e i n s h a p e and had s h a r p edges. Besides various b r u i s e s , the victim s u s t a i n e d a c u t a p p r o x i m a t e l i 1 1 / 2 i n c h e s l o n g which r e q u i r e d two s t i t c h e s t o c l o s e . The d e f e n d a n t was c h a r g e d under s e c t i o n 45-5-202 (1)(b), MCA, which s t a t e s : "A p e r s o n commits t h e o f f e n s e of a g g r a v a t e d a s s a u l t i f h e p u r p o s e l y o r knowingly c a u s e s : " (b) bodily i njury t o another with a . . . weapon . . ." P u r s u a n t t o t h e Montana s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s , t h e j u r y was i n s t r u c t e d a s f o l l o w s r e g a r d i n g weapon, b o d i l y i n j u r y and serious bodily injury: " I n s t r u c t i o n No. 1 3 " ' B o d i l y i n j u r y ' means p h y s i c a l p a i n , o r any impairment of p h y s i c a l c o n d i t i o n . " I n s t r u c t i o n No. 14 "You a r e i n s t r u c t e d t h a t t h e t e r m 'weapon' a s used i n t h e s e i n s t r u c t i o n s means any i n s t r u m e n t , a r t i c l e , o r s u b s t a n c e which, r e g a r d l e s s o f i t s p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n , i s r e a d i l y c a p a b l e of b e i n g used t o produce d e a t h o r s e r i o u s b o d i l y i n j u r y . " I n s t r u c t i o n No. " ' S e r i o u s b o d i l y i n j u r y ' means b o d i l y i n j u r y which c r e a t e s a s u b s t a n t i a l r i s k of d e a t h o r which c a u s e s s e r i o u s permanent d i s f i g u r e m e n t o r p r o t r a c t e d l o s s o r impairment of t h e f u n c t i o n o r p r o c e s s of any b o d i l y member o r o r g a n . " The e v i d e n c e shows a c u t and b r u i s e s t o t h e v i c t i m which a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o c o n s t i t u t e bodily injury. It is also readily a p p a r e n t t h a t a g l a s s a s h t r a y of t h e s i z e and shape which was h e r e i n v o l v e d c o n s t i t u t e s a weapon c a p a b l e of b e i n g used t o produce s e r i o u s b o d i l y i n j u r y . Quite clearly, striking a p e r s o n w i t h a n a s h t r a y of t h i s s i z e and s h a p e c o u l d r e s u l t i n s e r i o u s permanent d i s f i g u r e m e n t , o r impairment of t h e f u n c t i o n o f a b o d i l y member o r o r g a n . The s e c t i o n under which t h e d e f e n d a n t was c h a r g e d d o e s n o t r e q u i r e proof i n f a c t of serious bodily i n j u r y a s defined i n the s t a t u t e . I t i s only n e c e s s a r y t h a t t h e e v i d e n c e show t h a t t h e weapon was used i n s u c h a manner a t t h a t t i m e and p l a c e and on t h a t v i c t i m s o t h a t s e r i o u s b o d i l y i n j u r y was c a p a b l e of b e i n g i n f l i c t e d . The e v i d e n c e i s c l e a r l y s u f f i c i e n t t o s u s t a i n t h e j u r y ' s f i n d i n g of a g g r a v a t e d a s s a u l t on t h e p a r t of t h e d e f e n d a n t . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s a f f i r m e d . W Concur: e Chief J u s t i c e
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.
