State v. Otto, 2012 MT 199

Otto pled guilty to DUI in Havre City Court (misdemeanor under §61-8-401, MCA 2003) in Oct 2003.
In Feb 2005 in Havre, Otto was charged with a second-offense DUI, amended to misdemeanor DUI per se after plea.
On Oct 10, 2007, Otto pled nolo contendere to misdemeanor DUI in Chouteau County; advisement of rights form was provided before each conviction.
On April 15, 2010, Otto was found intoxicated in a vehicle on U.S. Highway 2; he refused sobriety tests and was charged April 19, 2010 with a DUI; as his fourth DUI offense, the charge was enhanced to a felony.
Otto moved to dismiss the felony charge Feb 14, 2011; district court denied; Otto pled guilty to one count of DUI on Aug 9, 2011 and was sentenced Sept 28, 2011 to thirteen months.
The court affirmed denial of the motion to dismiss, holding Otto’s three prior DUI convictions supported the felony enhancement; Knox and Yother were discussed to address the advisement of rights and the admissibility of prior convictions in determining the enhancement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Do Otto’s three prior DUI convictions support the felony enhancement?	Otto argues Knox requires broader advisement, making prior convictions infirm.	State contends Knox dicta do not render §46-12-210 deficient; prior advisements were proper.	Yes; three priors properly support enhancement; Knox dicta not controlling.

State v. Knox, 36 P.3d 383 (2001 MT 232) (advisement scope not expanded beyond statute; dicta in Knox clarified by court)
State v. Yother, 831 P.2d 1347 (1992 MT) (rights listed in Agreement were dicta in Yother and later imported into Knox)
State v. Gopher, 631 P.2d 293 (1981 MT) (dicta not binding precedent)
State v. Marble, 119 P.3d 88 (2005 MT 208) (clarified treatment of dicta in Knox/Yother line)
State v. Burns, 256 P.3d 944 (2011 MT 167) (example of rejecting collateral challenges to prior DUI convictions)