STATE v JINDRICH
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 89-340 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1390 STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Respondent, -vsJOSEPH THOMAS JINDRICH, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Fourth Judicial ~istrict, In and for the County of Missoula, The Honorable Jack L. Green, Judge presiding. COUNSEL OF RECORD: For Appellant: Joseph Thomas Jindrich, Pro Se, Missoula, Montana For Respondent: Hon. Marc Racicot, Attorney General, Helena, Montana James Yellowtail, Asst. Atty. General, Helena Robert L. Deschamps, 111, County Attorney, Missoula, Montana Submitted on Briefs: -- L -2 ,-' L .:C C March 22, 1990 Decided: March 30, 1990 Justice William E. Hunt, Sr., delivered the Opinion of the Court. Joseph Thomas Jindrich appeals from the verdict and judgment of the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, Missoula County, against him for Count I: driving without a valid driver's license, a misdemeanor, as specified in 5 61-5-102, MCA, and Count 11: failure to keep vehicle under control on a mountain roadway, a The defendant misdemeanor, as specified in 5 61-8-361, MCA. represented himself at all stages of the proceedings. On February 13, 1989, a jury trial was held and the defendant was found guilty on both counts. This Court finds substantial evidence in the record which supports the jury verdict and the District Court's judgment that the defendant shall be fined $25.00 on Count I and $30.00 on Count I1 to be paid to the Clerk of the District Court; that the defendant shall pay the cost of the jury in the amount of $250.80, payable through the Clerk of the District Court; and that the defendant shall pay a fee through the Clerk of the District Court in the amount of $20.00 ($10.00 on each count) as provided in 5 4 6 18-236, MCA. Affirmed. Let remittitur issue forthwith. See Rules 34 and 35, M.R.App.P. Pursuant to Section I, Par. 3(c), Montana Supreme Court 1988 Internal Operating Rules, this decision shall not be cited as precedent and shall be published by its filing as a public document with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and by a report of its result to the West Publishing Company. We concur: A
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.
