Gonzalez v. Day , 1999 MT 326N ( 1999 )

file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm
No. 99-206
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
1999 MT 326N
DANIEL ROMERO GONZALEZ,
Petitioner and Respondent,
v.
RICK DAY, et al.,
Respondents and Appellants.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial District,
In and for the County of Yellowstone,
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm (1 of 4)4/10/2007 2:58:37 PM
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm
Honorable Russell C. Fagg, Judge Presiding
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
David L. Ohler, Department of Corrections, Helena, Montana
For Respondent:
Jack E. Sands, Attorney at Law, Billings, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: November 18, 1999
Decided: December 22, 1999
Filed:
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm (2 of 4)4/10/2007 2:58:37 PM
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm
__________________________________________
Clerk
Chief Justice J. A. Turnage delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶ Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court 1996 Internal Operating
Rules, the following decision shall not be cited as precedent but shall be filed as a public document
with the Clerk of the Supreme Court and shall be reported by case title, Supreme Court cause
number and result to the State Reporter Publishing Company and to West Group in the quarterly
table of noncitable cases issued by this Court.
¶ This is an appeal from a judgment of the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone
County, granting Daniel Romero Gonzalez a writ of habeas corpus. We dismiss the appeal
because it has become moot.
¶ The issues raised on appeal relate to whether the court erred in concluding that Gonzalez,
who was adjudicated a delinquent youth, was entitled to release from confinement as a result of
the application of good time credit reducing the length of his commitment to the Department of
Corrections.
¶ Jurisdiction over a delinquent youth ceases when the youth reaches the age of 21. Section
41-5-205(1), MCA. Accordingly, Gonzalez's commitment to the supervision of the Department
of Corrections extended only until he reached the age of 21. The record indicates that Gonzalez
attained the age of 21 on December 16, 1999.
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm (3 of 4)4/10/2007 2:58:37 PM
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm
¶ "A moot question is one which existed once but because of an event or happening, it has
ceased to exist and no longer presents an actual controversy." State ex rel. Miller v. Murray
(1979), 183 Mont. 499, 503, 600 P.2d 1174, 1176. This Court does not normally address moot
questions. See Van Troba v. Montana State Univ., 1998 MT 292, ¶ 35, 291 Mont. 522, ¶ 35,
970 P.2d 1029, ¶ 35.
¶ Because Gonzalez has attained the age of 21, issues regarding whether he was entitled to be
released from confinement as a result of application of good time credits on his juvenile
commitment no longer present an actual controversy. Gonzalez is now beyond the jurisdiction of
the court for his juvenile offenses, and is thus ineligible for confinement based upon those offenses.
We therefore dismiss this appeal.
/S/ J. A. TURNAGE
We concur:
/S/ TERRY N. TRIEWEILER
/S/ JAMES C. NELSON
/S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART
/S/ JIM REGNIER
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/99-206%20Opinion.htm (4 of 4)4/10/2007 2:58:37 PM