State v. Norquay, 2011 MT 34

Kvelstad was beaten to death; Norquay, Main, Snow, Billy, Skidmore, Red Elk, and Anderson were at Snow's house earlier that night.
State charged Norquay with deliberate homicide and tampering with evidence related to a bloody shoe print and a witness statement.
DNA evidence from Megan Ashton was presented via videotaped deposition after scheduling difficulties and pregnancy leave; Norquay cross-examined during deposition.
Court allowed the videotaped deposition, finding Ashton unavailable and that defense had opportunity to cross-examine; trial delayed due to Ashton’s pregnancy and scheduling of ~50 witnesses.
Allen-instruction MPJIC 1-121 was given to a deadlocked jury; Norquay challenged language urging consideration of the ‘final test’ of quality of service.
Prosecutor’s trial comments included references to rape and alleged misstatements of homicide elements; Norquay claimed misconduct but the panel found no plain error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Confrontation rights with videotaped deposition	Norquay contends deposition violated confrontation rights.	Norquay argues State failed to show unavailability and good faith effort.	The deposition was proper; Ashton unavailable but cross-examined, good-faith effort shown.
Allen-instruction coerciveness	Instruction impermissibly coerced jurors to reach a verdict.	Instruction analogous to Cline/Bieber and not coercive.	Allen-instruction upheld; but final-test language to be revised for future use.
Prosecutorial misconduct	Prosecutor's comments inflamed the jury and misstated elements.	No misconduct or reversible error; no objection preserved for plain error review.	No prosecutorial misconduct found; plain error not established; no ineffective assistance shown.

In re T.J.B., 356 Mont. 342 (2010 MT 116) (evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion; confrontation analysis)
State v. Hart, 352 Mont. 92 (2009 MT 268) (unavailability and confrontation clause standards; cross-examination via deposition)
State v. Widenhofer, 950 P.2d 1383 (1997) (good faith effort to procure witness; unavailability factors)
City of Helena v. Roan, 226 P.3d 601 (2010 MT 29) (good cause for delay due to pregnancy; scheduling and trial continuity)
State v. Randall, 353 P.2d 1054 (1960 MT) (Allen-instruction coerciveness standards; minority rights)
State v. Cline, 555 P.2d 724 (1976) (Allen-instruction analysis; non-coercive guidance)
State v. Bieber, 170 Mont. 309 (2007 MT 262) (pattern Allen-instruction validation)
State v. McGuire, 307 F.3d 1192 (9th Cir. 2002) (pregnant witness unavailability considerations (federal))
Thompson v. Md., 371 Md. 473 (Md. 2002) (final-test language concerns in Allen-instructions)