State v. Keefe

• Decision Date: 08 January 2021
• Docket Number: DA 19-0368
• Citation: 403 Mont. 1,478 P.3d 830,2021 MT 8
• Parties: STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Steven Wayne KEEFE, Defendant and Appellant.
• Court: Montana Supreme Court

403 Mont. 1

478 P.3d 830

2021 MT 8

STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.Steven Wayne KEEFE, Defendant and Appellant.

DA 19-0368

Supreme Court of Montana.

Argued: September 11, 2020

Submitted: September 22, 2020

Decided: January 8, 2021

For Appellant: John R. Mills (argued), Genevie Gold, Phillips Black, Inc., Oakland, California Elizabeth K. Ehret, Attorney at Law, Missoula, Montana Alex R. Rate, ACLU of Montana, Missoula, Montana

For Appellee: Austin Knudsen, Montana Attorney General, Roy Brown (argued), Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana Colleen E. Ambrose, Bureau Chief, Department of Corrections, Helena, Montana Joshua A. Racki, Cascade County Attorney, Great Falls, Montana

For Amici Montana Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers: Colin M. Stephens, Smith & Stephens, P.C., Missoula, Montana

For Amici Juvenile Law Center: Benjamin M. Darrow, Darrow Law PLLC, Missoula, Montana Marsha L. Levick, Juvenile Law Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Justice Ingrid Gustafson delivered the Opinion of the Court.

¶1 Defendant and Appellant Steven Wayne Keefe (Keefe) appeals the May 6, 2019 Sentence, Order to Close File, and Order Exonerating Bond issued by the Eighth Judicial District Court, Cascade County, which, in relevant part, re-sentenced him to life without parole for three counts of deliberate homicide committed when he was a juvenile.¹

¶2 We restate the issues on appeal as follows:

1. Whether the District Court's failure to appoint Keefe his own expert violated Keefe's right to due process.

2. Whether there was sufficient evidence for the District Court to conclude Keefe was irreparably corrupt and permanently incorrigible.

3. Whether the issue of whether Keefe was irreparably corrupt and permanently incorrigible must be presented to a jury.

¶3 We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for a new sentencing hearing.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶4 On October 15, 1985, Keefe, then 17 years old, broke into a house near Great Falls intending to commit a burglary. Once inside, he shot and killed three people—David J. McKay, his wife Constance McKay, and their daughter Marian McKay Qamar.

The next day, Keefe was arrested on charges related to previous burglaries he had committed and transferred to the Pine Hills School for Boys. While at Pine Hills, Keefe told other residents he murdered three people while burglarizing a house near Great Falls. On March 21, 1986, Keefe was charged with three counts of deliberate homicide for the murders of the McKay family. The State amended the complaint on June 10, 1986, to add a burglary charge. Keefe was bound over from Youth Court to stand trial before the District Court as an adult. The matter went to trial in October 1986, and Keefe was ultimately convicted by the jury on all counts on October 22, 1986.

¶5 The District Court sentenced Keefe to three consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole at the Montana State Prison (MSP), with an additional ten years on each count for use of a weapon, on the deliberate homicide convictions, as well as an additional consecutive ten years, along with the ten-year enhancement for use of a weapon, on the burglary charge—a total sentence of three consecutive life terms plus 50 years. Keefe appealed his conviction to this Court in 1987, asserting the District Court erred by admitting evidence of his other crimes. We affirmed his conviction in 1988. See State v. Keefe , 232 Mont. 258, 759 P.2d 128 (1988).

¶6 On January 25, 2017, Keefe filed a petition for postconviction relief in the District Court, asserting his 1986 sentence of life without the possibility of parole was unconstitutional in light of the United States Supreme Court's decisions in Miller v. Alabama , 567 U.S. 460, 132 S. Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012) and Montgomery v. Louisiana , 577 U.S. 190, 136 S. Ct. 718, 193 L.Ed.2d 599 (2016). The Supreme Court's decisions in Miller and Montgomery collectively held that mandatory sentences of life without parole for juvenile offenders were unconstitutional "for all but the rarest of children, those whose crimes reflect ‘irreparable corruption.’ " Montgomery , 577 U.S. at 194, 136 S. Ct. at 726 (quoting Miller , 567 U.S. at 479-80, 132 S. Ct. at 2469 ). Montgomery held that Miller was to be applied retroactively because Miller "announced a substantive rule of constitutional law," Montgomery , 577 U.S. at 207, 136 S. Ct. at 734, and those juveniles already sentenced to life without parole "must be given the opportunity to show their crime did not reflect irreparable corruption; and, if it did not, their hope for some years of life outside prison walls must be restored." Montgomery , 577 U.S. at 211–213, 136 S. Ct. at 736-37. Proceedings before the District Court in the present case were stayed while this Court considered, and ultimately decided, Steilman v. Michael , 2017 MT 310, 389 Mont. 512, 407 P.3d 313. In Steilman , we held that the mandates of Miller and Montgomery "apply to discretionary sentences in Montana." Steilman , ¶ 3.

¶7 After this Court decided Steilman , the District Court lifted its stay on proceedings and issued its Memorandum and Order Re: Petition for Postconviction Relief, which determined Keefe must be resentenced in light of Miller , Montgomery , and Steilman because the original sentencing hearing did not consider Keefe's youth, background, mental health, or substance abuse. Keefe filed several motions before resentencing.² Relevant to the present proceeding, Keefe sought state funds for an expert and mitigation services and sought a jury determination of whether he was "irreparably corrupt" beyond a reasonable doubt pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 120 S. Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). On December 13, 2018, the District Court issued its Consolidated Order Re: Expert Testimony and Fees, which ordered the probation and parole office to perform an updated presentence investigation and appointed Dr. Robert Page as an independent expert to prepare a mental evaluation of Keefe as it determined the mental health information from Keefe's original sentencing was "outdated in light of the intervening decades’ advances in the fields of psychology and neuroscience." The District Court's order directed Dr. Page to consider, at a minimum:

1) The brain development of juveniles as a mitigating factor;

2) The effect of Keefe's developmental experiences on his commission of the crime;

3) An examination of Keefe's mental health prior to and contemporaneously with his commission of the crime;

4) An examination of Keefe's chemical dependency history prior to and contemporaneously with his commission of the crime; and

5) Any treatment recommendations related to Keefe's rehabilitation.

The District Court denied Keefe's motion for state funds to procure his own expert and his motion for a jury to determine whether he was "irreparably corrupt" in its January 15, 2019 Consolidated Order Denying [Defendant]’s Motions.

¶8 The District Court held a resentencing hearing on April 18, 2019. At the hearing, former Cascade County Sheriff's Deputy James Bruckner, Montana Department of Justice Department of Criminal Investigation Agent John Sullivan, Probation and Parole Officer Tim Hides, Dr. Page, former MSP supervisor Robert Shaw, and former MSP Warden James Mahoney testified. At the conclusion of the hearing, the District Court orally resentenced Keefe to three consecutive life terms at MSP, along with an additional consecutive 50 years for the burglary and weapons enhancements, without the possibility of parole. The District Court's written Sentence, Order to Close File, and Order Exonerating Bond followed on May 6, 2019. On June 7, 2019, Keefe filed a Motion for Reconsideration Before a New Judge, which the District Court denied with a written order on June 11, 2019. Keefe appeals. Additional facts will be discussed as necessary below.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

¶9 Motions requesting an examination by a psychiatrist where the existence of a mental disease or defect is not at issue fall within the discretion of the trial court, and we review those decisions for an abuse of discretion. State v. Hill , 2000 MT 308, ¶ 21, 302 Mont. 415, 14 P.3d 1237 (citations omitted). An abuse of discretion occurs when a court acts arbitrarily or unreasonably, resulting in substantial injustice. State v. Grimshaw , 2020 MT 201, ¶ 17, 401 Mont. 27, 469 P.3d 702 (citing State v. Holland , 2019 MT 128, ¶ 8, 396 Mont. 94, 443 P.3d 519 ).

¶10 This Court reviews criminal sentences for legality. State v. Yang , 2019 MT 266, ¶ 8, 397 Mont. 486, 452 P.3d 897 (citing State v. Coleman , 2018 MT 290, ¶ 4, 393 Mont. 375, 431 P.3d 26 ). We review a claim that a sentence violates the constitution de novo. State v. Tam Thanh Le , 2017 MT 82, ¶ 7, 387 Mont. 224, 392 P.3d 607 (citation omitted). "We review the district court's findings of fact on which its sentence is based to determine whether they are clearly erroneous." State v. Hamilton , 2018 MT 253, ¶ 14, 393 Mont. 102, 428 P.3d 849 (citing State v. Shults , 2006 MT 100, ¶ 34, 332 Mont. 130, 136 P.3d 507 ).

¶11 We review de novo whether a district court violated a defendant's constitutional rights at sentencing. State v. Haldane , 2013 MT 32, ¶ 17, 368 Mont. 396, 300 P.3d 657 (citations omitted).

DISCUSSION

¶12 This case involves the resentencing of Keefe for a triple homicide he committed while a juvenile. For these murders, Keefe was sentenced to three consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole. Keefe served approximately 30 years on his sentences before filing his 2017 petition for postconviction relief. During the intervening years, the U.S. Supreme Court issued several decisions which recognized the inherent differences which must be considered by a court when sentencing a juvenile. In accordance with those principles, the Supreme Court (1) banned the death penalty for juveniles in Roper v. Simmons , 543 U.S. 551, 125 S. Ct. 1183, 161 L.Ed.2d 1 (2005) ; (2) banned life...