519 P.3d 462
Mont.2022Background
- Aug. 31, 2019: William Hesse attacked and killed his roommate; charged with Deliberate Homicide and Tampering with or Fabricating Physical Evidence.
- Original trial date set for March 30, 2020; actual trial began Sept. 25, 2020 (391 days after arrest).
- Hesse filed two speedy-trial motions (Apr. 21, 2020; renewed Sept. 1, 2020); both were denied (second denial made orally at trial start).
- District Court, responding to COVID-19 and this Court’s directives, instructed the clerk to summon 150 jurors and to excuse prospective jurors who requested it; the clerk excused 59.
- Hesse moved to strike the jury panel based on the clerk’s excusals; the motion was denied after clerk testimony.
- Jury convicted Hesse on both counts; sentenced to concurrent 80- and 10-year terms. Convictions affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 391-day delay violated Hesse’s right to a speedy trial | Delay violated constitutional and state speedy-trial rights; charges should be dismissed | Delay was largely institutional due to COVID-19; Hesse asserted his rights and was not prejudiced | No violation: delay triggered review but was mostly institutional; Hesse failed to show prejudice; convictions affirmed |
| Whether clerk’s excusal of jurors without individualized court approval violated jury-selection statutes and denied fair cross-section | Clerk’s excusals without court approval breached § 3-15-313 and risked excluding groups (Native Americans, seniors) | Clerk acted under court direction and this Court’s COVID directives; excusals were mostly pandemic-related and panel remained representative | No error: substantial compliance with statute given public-health directives; panel was a fair cross-section |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ariegwe, 338 Mont. 442 (Mont. 2007) (articulates four-factor speedy-trial balancing test).
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1972) (framework for assigning weight to reasons for delay).
- State v. LaMere, 298 Mont. 358 (Mont. 2000) (requires substantial compliance with jury-selection procedures to protect fair cross-section rights).
- State v. Highpine, 303 Mont. 422 (Mont. 2000) (clerk’s departure from statutory summons procedures can disproportionately exclude groups and violate selection process).
- State v. Couture, 357 Mont. 398 (Mont. 2010) (acknowledges longer tolerable pretrial incarceration where charges are complex).