DAVID S. AUDET,
Petitioner and Appellant,
v.
STATE OF MONTANA,
Respondent and Respondent.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eighth Judicial District,
In and For the County of Cascade, Cause No. CDV-04-1004
Honorable Kenneth R. Neill, Presiding Judge
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
David S. Audet, Pro Se, Shelby, Montana
For Respondent:
Honorable Mike McGrath, Attorney General; Joslyn M. Hunt,
Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana
Brant Light, Cascade County Attorney; Susan Weber, Chief
Deputy County Attorney, Great Falls, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: January 10, 2006
Decided: February 7, 2006
Filed:
__________________________________________
Clerk
Chief Justice Karla M. Gray 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 David S. Audet appeals from the order of the Eighth Judicial District Court, Cascade
County, denying his petition for postconviction relief after a hearing regarding Audet’s claim
that trial counsel was ineffective for conceding Audet’s guilt to a misdemeanor charge at his
jury trial. The District Court noted trial counsel’s testimony that his reasons for conceding
Audet’s guilt were to bolster his credibility in denying a separate felony charge and to appeal
to the jury to convict him of one offense rather than two. It determined that counsel had
advised Audet of the strategy and the tactical decision was within the broad range of
reasonable decisions regarding trial tactics. On those grounds, the court concluded Audet
failed to establish trial counsel had performed deficiently.
¶3 Audet appeals, asserting his counsel was not present at his arraignment. The record
reflects, however, that another lawyer from the Cascade County Public Defender’s office was
present. Audet also contends the trial court improperly declined to accept his guilty plea to
the misdemeanor charge at the arraignment. The record indicates that the District Court
refused the plea based on its belief that Audet had not had sufficient time to consult with
counsel. Finally, Audet argues that, under these circumstances, counsel’s concession of his
2
guilt on the misdemeanor charge constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.
¶4 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(d)(v), of
our 1996 Internal Operating Rules, as amended in 2003, which provides for memorandum
opinions. It is manifest on the face of the briefs and the record that Audet’s appeal is without
merit because the issues are clearly controlled by settled Montana law that the District Court
correctly interpreted.
¶5 Affirmed.
/S/ KARLA M. GRAY
We concur:
/S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART
/S/ JOHN WARNER
/S/ JIM RICE
/S/ BRIAN MORRIS
3
