State v. Joseph Geren, 291 P.3d 1144

Geren was convicted in Park County District Court on ten counts: incest and attempted incest with his daughter; multiple incest and sexual intercourse without consent offenses with his step-ddaughter; and offenses involving his sister-in-law.
T.G. was 16 during the events; S.H. (16) and K.D. were involved as well; A.H. and other family members testified.
The State amended the information multiple times; trial proceeded on the Third Amended Information with ten counts.
During trial, the State moved to convert one count from Sexual Intercourse Without Consent to Attempted Sexual Intercourse Without Consent; Geren objected.
Geren was convicted March 31, 2011, and sentenced to 15 years with 5 suspended on each count, to be served consecutively.
Geren appeals on three issues: (1) failure to hold a hearing on jurors allegedly sleeping during trial; (2) double jeopardy arguments concerning incest and attempted incest; (3) alleged structural error for failing to arraign on an amended charge.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court abused its discretion by not holding a hearing on jurors’ sleep allegations.	Geren contends a hearing was required to test sleeping jurors.	Geren argues post-trial allegations should be examined to assess fairness.	No abuse of discretion; trial court properly denied a hearing.
Whether convictions for Incest and Attempted Incest violated double jeopardy.	Geren says two offenses based on the same transaction and one is included in the other.	Geren argues a single hunting-trip transaction encompassed both counts.	Not a double jeopardy violation; two separate transactions supported two convictions.
Whether failure to arraign on an amended charge was structural error.	Spotted Eagle requires arraignment on substance-amendments.	Amendment was form; no arraignment required; no prejudice.	Not structural error; amendment was form; no arraignment required.

State v. Billedeaux, 304 Mont. 89 (2001 MT 9) (denial of motion for new trial without hearing affirmed (in other contexts))
State v. Ariegwe, 167 P.3d 815 (2007 MT 204) (courts may deny new trial when curative measures suffice)
State v. Scheffer, 230 P.3d 462 (2010 MT 73) (amendment as to form/substance determined by elements change)
State v. Wilson, 340 Mont. 191 (2007 MT 327) (amendment analyses in information amendments)
State v. Clark, 964 P.2d 766 (1998 MT 221) (arraignment not required for form amendments; elements unchanged)
State v. Spotted Eagle, 243 P.3d 402 (2010 MT 222) (substantive amendment requires arraignment)
State v. Williams, 228 P.3d 1127 (2010 MT 58) (two offenses from separate transactions; double jeopardy considerations)
State v. Kingman, 362 Mont. 330 (2011 MT 269) (fair trial due process; plenary review standard)