State v. Sheehan, 399 P.3d 314

Sheehan, a heavy equipment operator, injured his left shoulder at work in 2009 and received temporary total disability (TTD) and medical benefits from the Montana State Fund.
Multiple treating providers initially diagnosed shoulder/cervical and brachial plexus injuries; some doctors found inconsistencies between Sheehan’s subjective pain reports and objective findings.
The State Fund’s Special Investigation Unit obtained videos (May and June 2010) showing Sheehan performing physical tasks (hammering, operating a skid steer, using a chainsaw) inconsistent with his reported limitations.
After physicians reviewed the videos, the State Fund sent a 14-day termination notice and discontinued Sheehan’s TTD benefits on July 8, 2010.
The State charged Sheehan in 2012 with felony theft by common scheme under § 45-6-301(5)(b), alleging he obtained TTD benefits by deception from May 3 to July 8, 2010; a jury convicted him and the Montana Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Sheehan obtained unauthorized control of workers’ compensation benefits by deception	Sheehan: he was statutorily authorized to receive TTD benefits until the State Fund complied with termination procedures (§ 39-71-609), so benefits through July 8 were not "unauthorized"	State: § 45-6-301(5)(b) criminalizes obtaining benefits by deception regardless of administrative termination process	Court: Affirmed conviction; sufficient evidence (videos plus physician testimony) that Sheehan knowingly obtained benefits by deception
Whether the jury should have been instructed on § 39-71-609 termination procedures	Sheehan: jury needed instruction on statutory termination criteria to determine whether control over benefits was "unauthorized"	State: termination procedures are administrative and not elements of the theft offense	Court: Rejected instruction; termination process not an element of theft statute; no abuse of discretion

State v. Spottedbear, 2016 MT 243, 385 Mont. 68, 380 P.3d 810 (standard for sufficiency of evidence review in criminal cases)
State v. Lackman, 2017 MT 127, 336 Mont. 6, 395 P.3d 477 (review of jury instruction legal correctness and prejudice)
State v. Shively, 2009 MT 252, 351 Mont. 513, 216 P.3d 732 (standard for reviewing statutory interpretation)
State v. Kaarma, 2017 MT 24, 386 Mont. 243, 390 P.3d 609 (duty to give instructions supported by the record)
State v. Nelson, 2014 MT 135, 375 Mont. 164, 334 P.3d 345 (statutory construction principles)
State v. Daniels, 2003 MT 30, 314 Mont. 208, 64 P.3d 1045 (criminal statute version at time of offense controls)
Wiard v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 2003 MT 295, 318 Mont. 132, 79 P.3d 281 (workers’ compensation statutes governing claims at time of injury)