Parks has filed a petition for a writ of supervisory control,
contending that the Missoula County District Court has not
properly addressed his petition for postconviction relief
(PCR) over the last twenty-two months. He requests that this
Court take control of his proceeding.
Court is familiar with Parks' underlying criminal matter.
In 2011, a jury found Parks guilty of three violations of
§ 30-10-301(1)(b), MCA, concerning fraudulent securities
transactions. The Missoula County District Court sentenced
Park to three consecutive ten-year terms with twenty years
suspended. Parks appealed. State v. Parks, 2013 MT
280, 372 Mont. 88, 310 P.3d 1088 (Parks I). This
Court affirmed as to one conviction and reversed the other
two convictions. Parks I, ¶ 36. We remanded the
matter to the District Court for resentencing. In November
2013, the District Court resentenced Parks to a ten-year
prison term with five years suspended. Parks appealed that
decision. State v. Parks, 2015 MT 32N, 378 Mont.
538, 348 P.3d 671 (table) (Parks II). We affirmed.
Parks II, ¶ 9.
instant petition for relief, Parks maintains that his
"current PCR case has wrongfully, needlessly and
deliberately languished in the Subject Court for 22 months to
this point." He states that he initially filed his
petition for PCR on May 3, 2016. At that time. Parks also
filed a notice of filing and a request for state-appointed
counsel. Parks raises many issues concerning his PCR
petition, his original conviction, and re-sentencing. He
argues that the court erred by not appointing counsel in his
PCR proceedings and that the court appears more lenient with
the State and more protective of his previous counsel in its
Orders. He includes thirty exhibits with his petition for
supervisory control, including a March 6, 2018 copy of the
District Court's case register or docket.
control is an extraordinary remedy. This Court may exercise
its supervisory power over all other courts on a case-by-case
basis. M. R. App. P. 14(3).
This extraordinary remedy can be invoked when the case
involves purely legal questions and urgent or emergency
factors make the normal appeal process inadequate. M. R. App.
P. 14(3); ... . The case must meet one of three additional
criteria: (a) the other court is proceeding under a mistake
of law and is causing a gross injustice; (b) constitutional
issues of state-wide importance are involved; or (c) the
other court has granted or denied a motion for substitution
of a judge in a criminal case. M. R. App. P. l4(3)(a)-(c).
State v. Spady, 2015 MT 218, ¶ 11, 380 Mont.
179, 354 P.3d 590 (internal citation omitted).
to Parks's assertions, there has been much activity in
his District Court proceeding. After Parks filed his initial
petition, on May 19, 2016, the District Court issued an Order
noting that his petition was not verified and was not served
upon counsel for the State of Montana. The court denied his
request for appointment of counsel and imposed a thirty-day
deadline to file and serve his amended petition in
conformance with § 46-21 -104, MCA. Parks filed an
Amended Original Petition for PCR on June 20, 2016. He
subsequently filed three requests for status of PCR procedure
in September, October, and November 2016. The court issued an
interim order on November 4, 2016, and explained that the
court cannot give legal advice or answer his questions
whether anything is "amiss or lacking . . . ." The
court also noted that his PCR petition was also not verified,
pursuant to § 46-21-103, MCA, and imposed a ten-day
deadline. On November 14, 2016, Parks filed a "Verified
Amended Petition for Post-Conviction Relief." The State
filed a notice of appearance on March 3, 3017, and the court
issued an order setting a briefing schedule.
2017, the State requested and received additional time to
respond to Parks's petition. The State also moved the
court for an Order protecting defense counsel, who at that
time had moved out of state and had not been located. The
State filed its response to Parks's petition on August
17, 2017, and Parks filed his reply on September 1, 2017.
Over the next several months, Parks also filed other
documents: a Motion to Order Placement of Petitioner's
Good Faith 2011 Pro Se Motion and Brief on the Record,
Preserving Claims; a Petition for Timely, Just and Fair
Disposition of My August 25 Motion and Grant for PCR
Proceedings; and a Notice of Petitioner's Conditional
Intent to Petition the Montana Supreme Court to Exercise
Supervisory Control. In the court's most recent Orders of
January 9, 2018, the court gave the State and previous
defense counsel more time to respond and preserved the Office
of Public Defender from disciplinary or malpractice claims.
Parks filed a response to these Orders.
petition does not justify this extraordinary remedy. There
are no specific timelines or deadlines in the statutes for
postconviction relief. Section 46-21-103, MCA, provides that
"[t]he proceeding for relief under 46-21-101 must be
commenced by filing a verified petition with the clerk of the
appropriate court. The clerk shall docket the petition upon
its receipt and bring the petition promptly to the attention
of the court." Parks filed his verified petition in
November 2016, and the matter was brought to the court's
attention. This matter is still proceeding, and after the
court receives all responses, it will issue a decision. We
conclude that Parks has not demonstrated that the District
Court is proceeding under a mistake of law, which imparls a
gross injustice, or that urgency or emergency factors exist.
Spady, ¶ 11; M. R. App. P. 14(3). Therefore, IT
IS ORDERED that Parks's Petition for a Writ of
Supervisory Control is DENIED.
Clerk is directed to provide a copy of this Order to the Hon.
Karen Townsend, Fourth Judicial District Court, Missoula
County; to ...