State v. Michelle Gable, 2015 MT 200

Michelle Coller Gable was convicted by jury of two counts of deliberate homicide and sentenced to two consecutive 100‑year terms.
The presentence investigation (PSI) and State sentencing memorandum recommended assigning Gable the $36,920 cost of her appointed Public Defender, plus juror and witness fees.
The State identified assets: multiple vehicles, a motorcycle, $10,000 cash held in evidence, and a possible Andrews Federal Credit Union account (checks totaling $37,582.11 that became void after 180 days).
Gable objected at sentencing only by asserting indigency; she did not provide detailed financial information or contest the OPD fee itemization.
The District Court found, after questioning the PSI author and counsel and considering § 72‑2‑813 (effect of killer on jointly held property), that Gable had or would have the ability to pay and ordered her to pay $36,920 to the OPD.
Gable appealed the OPD fee assignment, arguing the court failed to question/determine ability to pay, the fee chilled her jury right, and the OPD failed to file an itemized statement of hours/costs.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Whether the court failed to question defendant about ability to pay appointed counsel costs	State: court complied by relying on PSI, State memo, testimony, and parties’ argument	Gable: court did not directly question her as required by § 46‑8‑113(3)	Held: court adequately inquired; record distinguished from Moore and satisfied statutory requirement
2. Whether court failed to determine defendant had or would have ability to pay	State: assets and testimony showed available resources; joint property converted to tenancy in common under § 72‑2‑813	Gable: OPD’s indigency determination means she cannot be required to pay	Held: court permissibly considered assets (including presumed equal share of formerly joint property) and properly concluded she could pay; OPD indigency finding not binding on court
3. Whether assigning OPD costs chilled constitutional jury right	State: thorough inquiry prevents chilling effect	Gable: assigning attorney fees (higher after jury trial) chills right to jury trial	Held: same rigorous inquiry required as for jury fees was performed; no chilling effect found
4. Whether objection preserved OPD’s failure to file itemized hours/costs	State: defendant’s indigency objection did not preserve a separate objection to lack of itemization	Gable: OPD failed to file required itemization	Held: issue not preserved on appeal; court notes OPD must itemize hours/costs as required by statute

In re Estate of Garland, 279 Mont. 269, 928 P.2d 928 (1996) (§ 72‑2‑813 severs joint tenancy and transforms interests into tenancies in common, with presumption of equal undivided interests absent proof of disparate contributions)
Interstate Brands Corp. v. Cannon, 218 Mont. 380, 708 P.2d 573 (1985) (adopts implied findings doctrine: general findings may imply necessary, specific findings supported by evidence)