Griffin v. State , 2006 MT 52N ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                                            No. 05-418
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
    
    2006 MT 52N
    _______________________________________
    CALVIN Z. GRIFFIN,
    Petitioner and Appellant,
    v.
    STATE OF MONTANA,
    Respondent and Respondent.
    ______________________________________
    APPEAL FROM:         District Court of the Fourth Judicial District,
    In and for the County of Missoula, Cause No. DC 99-13802
    The Honorable Ed McLean, Judge presiding.
    COUNSEL OF RECORD:
    For Appellant:
    Calvin Z. Griffin (pro se), Deer Lodge, Montana
    For Respondent:
    Hon. Mike McGrath, Attorney General; Jennifer Anders, Assistant
    Attorney General, Helena, Montana
    Fred Van Valkenburg, County Attorney; Kristen Lacroix, Deputy County
    Attorney, Missoula, Montana
    ____________________________________
    Submitted on Briefs: February 23, 2006
    Decided: March 14, 2006
    Filed:
    ______________________________________
    Clerk
    Justice Brian Morris delivered the Opinion of the Court.
    ¶1        Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d)(v), Montana Supreme Court 1996 Internal
    Operating Rules, as amended in 2003, the following memorandum decision shall not be
    cited as precedent. It shall be filed as a public document with the Clerk of the Supreme
    Court and its case title, Supreme Court cause number and disposition shall be included in
    this Court's quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and
    Montana Reports.
    ¶2        Calvin Z. Griffin (Griffin) appeals from the order issued by the Fourth Judicial
    District Court, Missoula County, denying his Petition for Postconviction Relief. Griffin
    had filed a Motion to Waive Fines, Fees and Costs and Motion for Nunc Pro Tunc. We
    affirm.
    ¶3        The State charged Griffin with one hundred seventy-four counts of sexual abuse of
    children on July 21, 1999. Griffin entered into a plea agreement with the State pursuant
    to which the District Court sentenced him to forty years at Montana State Prison with
    thirty years suspended. The Sentence Review Division affirmed Griffin’s sentence and
    he did not appeal.
    ¶4        Griffin filed numerous pro se motions in the District Court over the next four
    years, including a petition for postconviction relief, attempting to have his sentence
    amended. The District Court denied all of Griffin’s motions. We affirmed the District
    Court’s order denying Griffin’s postconviction relief petition in Griffin v. State, 
    2003 MT 267
    , 
    317 Mont. 457
    , 
    77 P.3d 545
    . Griffin filed his most recent motion to waive the fines
    and costs associated with his sentence in March 2005, based upon this Court’s decision in
    State v. Fisher, 
    2003 MT 33
    , 
    314 Mont. 222
    , 
    65 P.3d 223
    . The District Court denied
    2
    Griffin’s motion on the grounds that he previously had filed a petition for postconviction
    relief that the District Court had denied and this Court had affirmed. The District Court
    further noted that not only had the time for bringing such post-judgment remedies expired
    long ago, but Griffin “has repeatedly bombarded this Court and the Montana Supreme
    Court in the ensuing years with a multitude of petitions which are, like this one, time
    barred.”
    ¶5     We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section 1, Paragraph 3(d) of
    our 1996 Internal Operating Rules, as amended in 2003, that provides for memorandum
    opinions. It is manifest on the face of the briefs and the record before us that Griffin’s
    appeal lacks merit. The District Court correctly applied settled Montana law to the legal
    issues raised by Griffin.
    ¶6     The postconviction statutes require that a petitioner raise all grounds for relief in
    the original or amended original petition. Section 46-21-105(1)(a), MCA. The District
    Court must dismiss a second or subsequent petition unless it raises grounds for relief that
    could not reasonably have been raised in the original or amended original petition.
    Section 46-21-105(1)(b), MCA. Griffin cannot avoid this procedural bar simply by
    renaming his petition a “Motion to Waive Fines and Costs” or a “Motion for Nunc Pro
    Tunc.” We affirm the District Court.
    /S/ BRIAN MORRIS
    We Concur:
    /S/ KARLA M. GRAY
    /S/ PATRICIA COTTER
    /S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART
    /S/ JIM RICE
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-418

Citation Numbers: 2006 MT 52N

Filed Date: 3/14/2006

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/19/2016