560 P.3d 1219
Mont.2024Background
- Heather Rose Johnson was convicted by jury in Montana for assault on a peace officer, DUI, driving with a suspended/revoked license, and expired registration following events on January 24-25, 2021.
- Her arrest stemmed from a 911 call reporting suspected intoxicated driving and subsequent police stop, during which Johnson performed poorly on field sobriety tests, was unable to provide a proper breath sample, and kicked a police officer.
- At trial, the entire 911 call—some of which included the caller's opinion that Johnson was intoxicated and would drive under the influence—was admitted by the district court over Johnson's confrontation clause objection; the caller did not testify.
- The district court included an "Audit Hearing" requirement in its written sentencing judgment, though this condition was not mentioned orally at sentencing.
- Johnson appealed on grounds that her confrontation rights were violated by admitting the 911 call's testimonial statements and that the written sentencing condition conflicted with the oral sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff’s Argument | Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| District Court violated confrontation rights by admitting full 911 call | Johnson: Admission of caller's opinion statements without cross-examination violated confrontation rights | State: 911 call admissible as business record and present sense impression | Confrontation rights violated, but error was harmless |
| Written judgment imposed "Audit Hearing" not stated orally | Johnson: Written and oral sentences must match | State: Conceded the conflict exists between oral and written | Oral pronouncement controls; written condition stricken |
Key Cases Cited
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (testimonial hearsay inadmissible without opportunity for cross-examination)
- Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813 (portions of 911 calls can be testimonial and require redaction)
- Ohio v. Clark, 576 U.S. 237 (primary purpose test for whether a statement is testimonial)
- State v. Laird, 397 Mont. 29 (confrontation clause applies to testimonial hearsay regardless of exceptions)
- State v. Hamilton, 393 Mont. 102 (oral pronouncement of sentence controls over written judgment)