Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Gatlin

Montana Supreme Court

Decided October 21, 2009No. DA 09-0017Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Nelson

¶32 I concur with the Court’s analysis and it’s holding that the charges against Gatlin must be dismissed. Opinion, ¶ 23. I dissent from the Court’s determination, however, that the charges not be dismissed with prejudice.

¶33 The Court holds in Issue 2 that Gatlin suffered no prejudice as a result of his inadequate initial appearance and the unreasonable delay *170in filing the Information. Opinion, ¶¶ 27-29. As a result, the Court holds that the Information should be dismissed without prejudice, thus giving the State the opportunity to re-file the charges and to take a second bite of the apple.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. RobisonMontana Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. McElderryMontana Supreme Court · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API