Court Summaries, 0418 WYBJ, Vol. 41 No. 2. 40
| Author | Anna Reeves Olson, Park Street Law Offices Casper, Wyoming |
| Position | Vol. 41 2 Pg. 40 |
Anna Reeves Olson, Park Street Law Offices Casper, Wyoming
March 2018 Civil Court updates Steven Dean McLaren v. State of Wyoming
S-17-0010
2017 WY 154
December 28, 2017
One night in 2014, Steven McLaren injected some methamphetamine and experienced severe hallucinations. While he was under the influence of the methamphetamine, he assaulted his girlfriend and nearly killed her. McLaren was charged with five felonies and during the course of the proceedings underwent multiple competency evaluations, which all found him competent to proceed. Despite the results of the competency evaluations, McLaren plead not guilty by reason of mental illness (NGMI). Later McLaren wanted to withdraw the NGMI plea, but the district court would not allow him to do so. McLaren was later convicted of all counts.
On appeal, McLaren argued that the district court violated his constitutional right to due process when, despite repeated indications that he did not want to pursue his NGMI plea, the court failed to allow him to withdraw it. The Supreme Court agreed with McLaren and reversed. The Court reasoned that an attorney cannot assert an NGMI defense over the objection of a competent defendant and noted that most jurisdictions hold that neither the trial court nor defense counsel may impose an insanity defense over the defendant's objection. The Court also stated that "[t]here are persuasive reasons why defendants should have the power to decide whether to plead NGMI," because an acquittal on NGMI may "result in the institution of commitment proceedings which lead to confinement in a mental institution for a period longer than the potential jail sentence." Accordingly, the case was reversed.
Berenergy Corp. v. BTU Western Resources, Inc., et al.
S-17-0040
2018 WY 2
January 4, 2018
This case involves a dispute between mineral developers in Wyoming's Powder River Basin. Berenergy Corporation produces oil from several sites under three oil and gas leases granted by the U.S. BLM. The surface area covered by those leases and wells overlaps lands that, pursuant to BLM coal leases, affiliates of Peabody Energy Corporation (Peabody) are planning to strip-mine.
Berenergy filed a complaint for a declaratory judgment that the terms of its earlier-acquired BLM oil leases provided it with rights superior to any obtained by Peabody through its later coal leases.
On the other hand, Peabody took the position that the clear and unambiguous language of the oil leases expressly required Berenergy to give "due regard" to coal development, to operate its wells in such a manner as to cause "minimal adverse effect on ultimate recovery" of coal, and in cases of disagreement with coal lessees, to submit the matter to the state district court.
After partial granting of cross motions for summary judgment and a trial, both parties appealed. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that a very important aspect of this case was that despite all of the leases at issue being federal leases, the BLM has not been...
To continue reading
Request your trial