State v. J. Harrison, 385 Mont. 227

Background

In 2015 James John Harrison pleaded guilty to five felonies arising from illegal baiting, killing, and transporting of nine black bears (2009–2014).
At sentencing the District Court orally imposed a 10-year prison term, all suspended, and multiple conditions including lifetime prohibitions on (1) hunting, fishing, and trapping, and (2) accompanying any hunter, angler, or trapper.
The District Court’s written judgment (Sept. 9, 2015) included Conditions 23–24, each stating Harrison could petition under § 46-18-208 for early termination of the sentence/condition after serving two-thirds of the suspended time.
The State moved to conform the written judgment to the oral pronouncement, arguing the written statement that Harrison may seek early termination conflicted with the oral sentence and that the Title 87 lifetime ban is an independent statutory penalty not subject to § 46-18-208 early termination.
The District Court denied the State’s motion, treating the lifetime bans as conditions of the suspended sentence and thus modifiable by petition under § 46-18-208; the State appealed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Harrison)	Held
Whether the lifetime prohibition on hunting, fishing, and trapping (imposed under § 87-6-202(6)(f)) is subject to early termination under § 46-18-208	The Title 87 lifetime ban is an independent statutory penalty, not a condition of suspension, so it cannot be terminated under § 46-18-208; the written provision permitting petition conflicts with the oral sentence and nullifies the "lifetime" aspect	The written judgment’s inclusion of § 46-18-208 reflects that the bans were conditions of the suspended sentence and thus Harrison may petition for early termination after meeting statutory requirements	Reversed as to Condition 23: the Court held the Title 87 lifetime ban is a separate statutory penalty and not subject to early termination under § 46-18-208; the sentence must be conformed by striking the petition language from Condition 23
Whether the lifetime prohibition on accompanying any hunter, angler, or trapper (no statutory source) is subject to early termination under § 46-18-208	The State argued the written petition language conflicted with the oral sentence or, if a condition, the District Court failed to properly limit petition rights	Harrison argued the accompaniment ban is a sentencing condition (no independent statutory basis) and thus petitionable under § 46-18-208; written notice suffices even if not orally pronounced	Affirmed as to Condition 24: because no statutory authority independently creates the accompaniment ban, it is a condition of sentence and may be the subject of an early-termination petition under § 46-18-208

Key Cases Cited

State v. Duong, 343 P.3d 1218 (Mont. 2015) (standard of review for sentence legality and statutory interpretation)
State v. Claassen, 291 P.3d 1176 (Mont. 2012) (oral pronouncement of sentence controls over conflicting written judgment)
State v. Lane, 957 P.2d 9 (Mont. 1998) (oral pronouncement rule and finality of sentence)
State v. Sommers, 339 P.3d 65 (Mont. 2014) (statutory interpretation should be reasonable and avoid absurd results)