VOLUME NO. 52

OPINION NO. 4

CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES - Authority of a multijurisdictional detention center to
house inmates committed to an out-of-state correctional facility;
CORRECTIONS, DEPARTMENT OF - Authority of the Department to determine
whether convicted offenders from out of state may be housed at a multijurisdictional
detention center;
FELONS - Authority of a multijurisdictional detention center to contract for the
confinement of out-of-state felons;
LOCAL GOVERNMENT - Authority of a multijurisdictional detention center to house
inmates committed to an out-of-state correctional facility;
PRISONERS - Authority of a multijurisdictional detention center to house inmates
committed to an out-of-state correctional facility;
ADMINISTRATIVE RULES OF MONTANA (2007) - Sections 20.27.101 to 20.27.261;
20.28.155;
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED - Title 53, chapter 30, parts 3, 5; Title 49, chapter 19,
parts 3, 4; Title 46 chapter 19, part 3; Title 7, chapter 32, part 22; Title 7, chapter 11, part
1; sections 1-2-102, 7-32-2201, (1), (2)(b), (4), -2202(1), -2203, (1), (2), (3), (4), (5),
-2206, -2234, -2241(2), (6), -2242, (1), -2243, (1), (2), (3), 46-18-201(3)(c), 46-19-402,
53-1-203, 53-30-101, -106, (2), -504, (10), -507, -603, (3), -604 to -607;
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (2003) - Section 53-30-603(3);
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1999) - Section 53-503(6), -504(10);
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1997) - Title 53, chapter 30, part 6; sections 53-30504, (8), -603(2);
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1995) - Title 53, chapter 30, part 5; sections 53-30502, -503(6);
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1993) - Title 53, chapter 30, part 4;
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1991) - Title 53, chapter 20, part 3; section 53-30101(2);
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1989) - Title 7, chapter 11, part 1; sections 7-322203, (5), -2242, (1), (2), (3), -2243, (1), (2);
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1987) - Section 7-32-2201;
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (1979) - Section 7-32-2203, -2206;
MONTANA LAWS OF 1989 - Chapter 561, section 15;
OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL - 51 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 15 (2006).

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 2
HELD:

A multijurisdictional detention center may contract for the confinement of
out-of-state and federal inmates only for the purposes authorized by Mont.
Code Ann. § 7-32-2203, which do not include confinement of adult felony
and misdemeanor offenders who are committed by an out-of-state
jurisdiction or the federal government. That authority has been reserved to
the Department of Corrections, under narrow circumstances only, which
evidences a legislative intent not to allow routine interstate exchange of
inmates in and out of Montana.
December 3, 2007

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
Hardin City Attorney
406 North Cheyenne Avenue
Hardin, MT 59034
Dear Ms. Convery:
[P1] You have requested my opinion on the following two questions:
1.

Does the Montana Department of Corrections have jurisdiction to
determine whether convicted offenders from out-of-state law
enforcement and correctional agencies may be housed at a
multijurisdictional detention center created pursuant to Mont. Code
Ann. § 7-32-2201?

2.

May a multijurisdictional detention center located in Montana
contract for the confinement of adult felony and misdemeanor
offenders who are lawfully convicted by an out-of-state jurisdiction
or the federal government to confinement in a detention center
located in either jurisdiction?

[P2] According to the information provided, the City of Hardin, by and through its
lawfully established port authority, Two Rivers Authority, and the City of Lodge Grass,
have entered into an interlocal agreement to operate a multijurisdictional detention center
in Hardin. Such an agreement is authorized by Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2201(1).
Pursuant to subsection (2)(b) of that statute, the parties have contracted with a private
party to operate the detention center.

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 3
[P3] The detention center is known as the Two Rivers Detention Center (the “facility”).
Construction is now complete, and the facility is ready for occupancy. The parties intend
that the facility be used by the Montana Department of Corrections (the “Department”),
federal agencies such as the United States Border Patrol, the U.S. Marshals Service, the
Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the City of Hardin, the City of Lodge
Grass, Big Horn County, and other political subdivisions of the State, as well as
government units from out of state that wish to confine inmates or detainees in the
facility. Your questions are presumably motivated by the intention to contract with other
states, as well as the federal government, for the confinement of adult felony or
misdemeanor offenders committed by another state jurisdiction or the federal
government. 1 The Department has opined that the facility has no authority to do so.
[P4] The answer to your questions requires consideration of the statutes governing
detention centers, as well as the statutes governing other correctional facilities in Title 53,
chapter 30. Detention centers are addressed in Title 7 (local government), chapter 32
(law enforcement). All other correctional facilities and programs are addressed in Title
53 (social services and institutions), chapter 30 (corrections). These include community
corrections programs and facilities, boot camp, regional correctional facilities, and
private correctional facilities.
I.

Correctional Facilities and Programs in Title 53, Chapter 30

[P5] The state prison in Deer Lodge is the historically recognized correctional facility for
adult felony offenders in Montana. Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-101. Over the years, the
Legislature has authorized additional facilities and programs as needed. For example, a
state prison for adult female offenders was added in 1991. Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30101(2) (1991). Also in 1991, the Legislature authorized the adult community corrections
program in Montana Code Annotated Title 53, chapter 30, part 3. The boot camp
incarceration program was added the following session. Title 53, chapter 30, part 4
(1993).
[P6] In 1995, the Legislature enacted the Regional Correctional Facility Act, presumably
in response to the need for additional prison space. Mont. Code Ann. tit. 53, ch. 30, pt. 5
Use of the facility to confine misdemeanor offenders sentenced to imprisonment
therein is authorized in Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203(4). Also, use of the facility to
confine adult offenders sentenced to the state prison is also specifically authorized in
Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203(5). The pertinent question is whether the facility may be
used to confine adult offenders who are sentenced to out-of-state correctional facilities,
including federal prisons.
1

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 4
(1995). The purpose of the Act is to “provide a method by which the state and local
governments can make the most efficient use of their powers and resources by enabling
them to cooperate to fulfill their respective responsibilities of providing services and
facilities for the incarceration and rehabilitation of criminal offenders at regional
correctional facilities.” Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-502 (1995).
[P7] A “regional correctional facility” is defined as “a correctional facility, except the
Montana state prison, the women’s correctional system, or the Swan River boot camp,
designed, constructed or operated under this part by a local governmental entity or the
department, or both, for the housing of convicted felons.” In 1999, this definition was
amended to read that a “[r]egional correctional facility means a facility for the housing of
persons charged with or convicted of a criminal offense that is a joint detention center
and correctional facility and that is designed, constructed, or operated under this part by a
local government entity, a corporation, the department, or any combination of a local
government entity, a corporation, and the department.” Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-503(6)
(1999). Currently there are two regional correctional facilities in Montana, one in Great
Falls and one in Glendive. In accordance with Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-504, the
Department may utilize the “state correctional portion” of these facilities to house
inmates sentenced to the Department or its correctional facilities. The Department is
given rulemaking authority over regional correctional facilities, including siting of the
facilities. Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-507. In addition, the Department must adopt rules
governing the construction, operation and physical condition of the state correctional
portion of the facility, and must ensure that such facilities that are privately owned
comply with federal and American Correctional Association (ACA) health care
standards. Id.; Mont. Admin. R. 20.17.101 to 20.27.261 (2007).
[P8] When originally enacted, the Regional Correctional Facility Act did not mention
out-of-state or federal inmates. In 1997, the Legislature amended section 53-30-504
(granting the Department authority to contract for detention center services) to include a
new subsection (8), which does mention out-of-state inmates: “A person convicted in
another state may not be confined in the state portion of a regional correctional facility in
this state unless the confinement is under and governed by Title 46, chapter 19, part 3 or
4 [the Interstate Compact Provisions].” This provision was subsequently amended to
read:
A regional correctional facility may house persons who are charged or
convicted in this state, another state, or federal court in the detention center
portion of a regional correctional facility. A person charged or convicted in
another state or charged or convicted in federal court in another state may
not be confined in a state correctional facility portion of a regional

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 5
correctional facility in this state unless the confinement is under and
governed by Title 46, chapter, 19, part 3 or 4, and the department
authorizes the placement of the person in the state correctional portion of
the regional correctional facility.
Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-504(10) (1999). Thus, persons convicted in other jurisdictions
may be confined in a regional correctional facility, but only under those circumstances
described in Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-504.
[P9] Also in 1997, the Legislature authorized the construction of private correctional
facilities. Mont. Code Ann. tit. 53, ch. 30, pt. 6 (1997). Such facilities are designed,
constructed, and licensed under strict standards set by the Department. Mont. Code Ann.
§ 53-30-604 to -607; Mont. Admin. R. 20.28.155 (2007). When private correctional
facilities were first authorized, the Legislature allowed their use for housing out-of-state
inmates brought into Montana pursuant to an Interstate Compact agreement. Mont. Code
Ann. § 53-30-603(2) (1997). Two years later, however, the Legislature amended Mont.
Code Ann. § 53-30-603 to strictly forbid out-of-state or federal inmates in private
correctional facilities. This continued until 2003, when the Legislature once again
authorized the use of private correctional facilities to house out-of-state and federal
inmates upon approval by the Department of a written agreement between the originating
jurisdiction and the private correctional facility. Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-603(3)
(2003). In all cases, however, the Legislature mandated that out-of-state and federal
inmates be physically separated from Montana inmates. There is one private correctional
facility in Montana: Crossroads Correctional Center in Shelby, Montana.
[P10] The Department retains ultimate control over the interstate movement of inmates
in all facilities described in Title 53, chapter 30. For example, the Department has the
authority to declare when the inmate population of a correctional institution or system has
been exceeded, and to contract with other state, local and federal authorities for the
confinement of Montana inmates in that instance, or when the Department has no
institution that is adequate for certain inmates. Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-106. The
Department is the only entity statutorily authorized to engage in the interstate exchange
of felony offenders under the Interstate Corrections Compact, Title 46 chapter 19. Mont.
Code Ann. § 46-19-402. Similarly, the State of Montana is a party to the Western
Interstate Corrections Compact described in Title 49, chapter 19, part 3, which allows for
the movement of inmates in the western states. No other government entity or
correctional facility or program described in Title 53, chapter 30, is authorized to contract
to bring prisoners into this State for any purpose. Currently there are some 30
out-of-state inmates in Montana, and a comparable number of Montana felons are housed
out of state under interstate compacts.

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 6
[P11] The Department maintains a complex system of classification to determine the
proper placement of inmates in the correctional facilities mentioned above. While the
facility may make individual placement determinations within its confines (subject to any
rules of segregation imposed by law, as in Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-504(10)), the
Department is ultimately responsible for making placement decisions concerning
Montana’s inmates, taking into account the safety, security, treatment and rehabilitation
needs of the inmates, as well as facility characteristics. See Mont. Code Ann. § 53-1203; § 46-18-201(3)(c).
II.

Title 7, Chapter 32, Part 22: Detention Centers

[P12] As noted, a detention center is the only correctional facility in Montana that is not
specifically addressed in Title 53, chapter 30. This is likely because detention centers
were historically referred to as “county jails,” which explains their provisions in the local
government section of the Montana code. See Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2201 (1987). The
change in terminology occurred in 1989, when the Legislature replaced the term “county
jail” with “detention center.” 1989 Mont. Laws, ch. 561, § 15. The 1989 amendments
did not affect the general operation of these facilities, and they remain under the
management and authority of the local governing body and/or the detention center
administrator. See Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2234 (placing the immediate management
and control of the facility within the authority of the administrator, who is hired by the
county); accord, Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2201(4) (granting the board of county
commissioners jurisdiction and power to cause a detention center to be erected, furnished,
maintained and operated).
[P13] A “detention center” is defined as a facility established and maintained by an
appropriate entity for the purpose of confining arrested persons or persons sentenced to
the detention center. Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2241(2). Similarly, a “multijurisdictional
detention center” is defined as a facility established and maintained by two or more local
governments for the confinement of persons arrested or sentenced to confinement or a
local detention center contracting to confine persons arrested or sentenced in other local
governments. Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2241(6). The latter situation would occur, for
example, when a contiguous county has no detention center, in which case the
Legislature has authorized the use of a detention center in a contiguous county for the
confinement of inmates. Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2202(1).
[P14] County jails and detention centers were historically used on a short-term basis to
detain or confine (1) persons committed in order to secure their attendance as witnesses at
trial; (2) persons charged with a crime and committed for trial; (3) persons committed for
contempt or upon civil process; or (4) persons sentenced to imprisonment therein upon

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 7
conviction of a crime (misdemeanor offenders). Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203 (1979).
In 1989, the Legislature amended section 7-32-2203 to expand use of a detention center
“for the confinement of persons sentenced to the state prison, as agreed upon by the state
and the administrator in charge of the detention center.” Mont. Code Ann. § 7-322203(5) (1989). This was the first time the Legislature authorized use of a detention
center for longer term confinement of felons. While Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2206
(1979) authorized the confinement of federal prisoners and assigned costs to the federal
agency, that statute does not purport to supercede Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203, limiting
the use of the facility for short-term purposes.
[P15] In any event, the Legislature repealed Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2206 in 1989 and
enacted Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2242 to address the payment of costs by users of the
facility. Subsection (1) of Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2242 provides that when the
detention center is utilized by other local state or federal agencies “for the confinement of
arrested persons and the punishment of offenders,” payment of the cost for those services
is set forth in Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2242. Subsection (2) places the primary
responsibility for costs on “the arresting agency.” There is no mention of costs for the
confinement of out-of-state felons. The only reference to persons from out-of-state
appears in subsection (3), which addresses “fugitives from justice from an out-of-state
jurisdiction.” In that circumstance, the expense of holding the person in a detention
center “pending extradition” must be paid by the out-of-state jurisdiction.
[P16] Also in 1989, the Legislature enacted Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2243, which
requires that all contracts for detention services between state or local government units,
the state of Montana, or the federal government are to be made pursuant to the Interlocal
Cooperation Act, Title 7, chapter 11, part 1. Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2243(1).
Subsection (2) of that statute authorizes a government unit responsible for the detention
center (in this case, the Two Rivers Authority), to contract with a government unit of
another state for the confinement of lawfully committed inmates in a detention center
located in either jurisdiction. While subsection (2) appears to allow the housing of
lawfully committed felons from other jurisdictions, I note that out-of-state felons are not
among those persons listed in § 7-32-2203 who may be confined in a detention center.
[P17] Currently, the list of persons who may be confined in the detention center is found
in Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203:
Who may be confined in a detention center. Detention centers are
used as follows:
(1)
for the detention of persons committed in order to secure their
attendance as witnesses in criminal trials;

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 8
(2)
for the detention of persons charged with crime and
committed for trial;
(3)
for the confinement of persons committed for contempt or
upon civil process or by other authority of law;
(4)
for the confinement of persons sentenced to imprisonment
therein upon conviction of a crime;
(5)
for the confinement of persons sentenced to the state prison,
as agreed upon by the state and the administrator in charge of the detention
center.
[P18] Notably absent from this list is the use of a detention center to confine persons
committed to imprisonment in another jurisdiction for the purpose of serving their
sentences imposed in that other jurisdiction. While subsections (1), (2), and (3) could
apply to persons from out of state, the commitment would be only for the purposes
described therein (e.g., securing the person’s attendance as a witness in a criminal trial;
detaining persons charged with a crime and committed for trial; or confining persons
committed for contempt). This is consistent with the cost provisions in Mont. Code Ann.
§ 7-32-2242, which place the responsibility for payment on the “arresting agency.”
[P19] Subsection (4) of Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203 clearly addresses those persons
directly committed to the facility, i.e., misdemeanor offenders, and would not include
out-of-state convicted felons. Subsection (5) authorizes the confinement of persons
sentenced to the state prison, meaning the Montana state prison as that term is defined in
Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-101, supra. It does not authorize use of the facility for adult
offenders sentenced to confinement in other states.
III.

Discussion

[P20] In response to your first question, these statutes make clear that the Department
has no “jurisdiction” over the establishment, operation, or maintenance of a facility such
as the Two Rivers Detention Center. The Department’s only connection to the facility is
by way of Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-106(2), which allows the Department to contract
with the commissioners of counties that have suitable detention centers, and Mont. Code
Ann. § 7-32-2203(5), which authorizes use of the facility “for the confinement of persons
sentenced to the state prison, as agreed upon by the state and the administrator in charge
of the detention center.”
[P21] That said, however, I believe that the answer to your ultimate question--whether
the facility may house out-of-state or federal adult felony offenders--does not depend on
the Department’s jurisdiction, but rather, on the intent of the legislature relative to

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 9
Montana’s overall correctional scheme, as evidenced in the history of the relevant
statutes.
[P22] Prior to 1989, the only correctional facility available for the long-term
confinement of adult felony offenders was the state prison in Deer Lodge. There was no
interstate movement of inmates unless prison population was exceeded, or an interstate
compact was negotiated. As prison population expanded, the Legislature authorized
additional facilities for convicted felons within the state, including regional and private
correctional facilities. As the above statutes demonstrate, the comingling of Montana and
out-of-state or federal prisoners in these facilities is strictly regulated, with ultimate
oversight by the Department.
[P23] While the state prison housed felons, the county jails housed misdemeanor
offenders and other persons on a short-term basis as set forth in Mont. Code Ann. § 7-322203. The statutes also allowed use of a county jail facility for federal prisoners, with
costs to be borne by the federal government, but presumably only for the purposes
outlined in Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203. There is no indication that the Legislature
intended county jails for anything but short-term confinement of offenders or other
persons described in Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203.
[P24] In 1989, the Legislature adopted Senate Bill 452, which expanded the traditional
uses of a county jail (renamed a detention center) to include the confinement of persons
sentenced to the state prison. Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203(5). This was the first time
the Legislature authorized the long-term confinement of convicted felons in a facility
other than the state prison, presumably because the need was there. There was no
mention in the hearings on Senate Bill 452 of expanding use of a county jail to include
long-term confinement of out-of-state or federally convicted felons. Clearly the
Legislature was concerned with providing space for Montana’s inmates, not bringing in a
new population of out-of-state offenders.
[P25] While the Legislature added two provisions in 1989 that mention use of detention
centers by other government entities, including local, state and federal law enforcement
and correctional agencies, the clear intent of Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2242 is to address
the payment of costs for persons housed from other jurisdictions. Similarly, the clear
intent of § 7-32-2243(1) is to require that contracts between these entities comply with
the Interlocal Cooperation Act. There is no indication that the Legislature was
significantly expanding the traditional use of county jail/detention centers to include
long-term confinement of out-of-state or federal felons when it assigned costs or contract
obligations. Although subsection (2) of Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2243 authorizes a
detention center “to contract with a government unit of another state for the confinement

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 10
of lawfully committed inmates,” the meaning of this subsection is ambiguous given the
restricted uses of the facility in Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203. Generally, the plain and
unambiguous language of a statute controls. Stop Over Spending Montana v. State,
2006 MT 178, ¶ 62, 333 Mont. 42, 139 P.3d 788. While the plain language of § 7-322243(2) grants contracting authority, the extent of that authority is unclear, particularly in
light of § 7-32-2203. Given this ambiguity, it is appropriate to consider legislative intent
and other means of statutory construction. Id.
[P26] The rules of statutory construction dictate that specific statutory provisions control
over more general statutes, and that the Legislature is presumed not to pass meaningless
legislation. See Montanans for Equal Application of Initiative Laws v. State ex rel.
Johnson, 2007 MT 75, ¶ 74, 336 Mont. 450, 154 P.3d 1202; Oster v. Valley County,
2006 MT 180, ¶ 17, 336 Mont. 76, 140 P.3d 1079. In this case, Mont. Code Ann. § 7-322203 is the more specific statute, since it deals particularly with the question of what
inmates may be housed in a detention center, compared to the more general discussion in
§ 7-32-2243(2) of contracts. The specifications in § 7-32-2243 would be rendered
meaningless if local governments were free to add new categories of allowable prisoners
at will.
[P27] In the construction of a statute, the intent of the Legislature must be pursued, if at
all possible. 51 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 15 (2006), citing Mont. Code Ann. § 1-2-102.
Therefore, while the language of Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2243 allows a government unit
responsible for a detention center to “contract with a government unit of another state for
the confinement of lawfully committed inmates in a detention center located in either
jurisdiction,” that statute must be read in conjunction with Mont. Code Ann. § 7-32-2203,
and also with the overall intent of the Legislature regarding Montana’s correctional
system. Section 7-32-2203 of the Montana Code Annotated specifies who may be
confined in a detention center, and does not authorize the long-term confinement of
out-of-state or federal inmates for purposes of serving a felony sentence imposed in
another jurisdiction. The rules of statutory construction require that statute relating to the
same subject matter be harmonized, as there is a presumption that the Legislature would
not have passed legislation that has no meaning or purpose. Oster v. Valley County,
supra, 2006 MT 180, ¶ 17.
[P28] In summary, there is nothing granting independent authority to a detention center
to contract freely with out-of-state or federal authorities for long-term confinement of
inmates convicted in other jurisdictions. The Legislature clearly intended to limit the
authority of any correctional facility or governmental entity, other than the State through
the Department of Corrections, to contract for the placement of Montana inmates out-ofstate, or to receive offenders from other jurisdictions. This is evidenced by the interstate

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 11
corrections compact provisions, the restrictions on placement of out-of-state inmates in
regional and private correctional facilities, and the Department’s exclusive role in
determining when inmate capacity is exceeded and how best to deal with that problem.
[P29] The fact that detention centers are governed by provisions in Title 7, pertaining to
local government, as opposed to Title 53, does not grant the facility absolute autonomy
over decisions relating to inmate population. Rather, that fact simply reflects the
historical use of these facilities as county jails. The statutorily authorized uses in Mont.
Code Ann. § 7-32-2203 are consistent with those of a “county jail,” and nothing therein
allows the facility to house out-of-state inmates. When the Legislature added subsection
(5) in 1989 to allow Montana convicted felons into these facilities for the first time, there
was no discussion of expanding traditional uses to include out-of-state and federally
convicted felons. Such a change would completely transform the nature of the facility
from a county jail to a regional correctional facility, without any of the restrictions
imposed on those facilities. Had the Legislature intended such a result, it presumably
would have addressed the issue of out-of-state inmate populations mixing with Montana
inmates, as it did with regional correctional facilities. Moreover, if the facility enjoyed
the level of autonomy you describe, it could feasibly fill to capacity with out-of-state
offenders and no longer be available to the Department for placement of Montana
offenders pursuant to Mont. Code Ann. § 53-30-106.
[P30] In short, convicted felons enter Montana to serve sentences imposed in other
jurisdictions in only two ways: (1) when the Department has approved the exchange
under the Interstate Corrections Compact or the Western States Interstate Compact, or (2)
by written agreement between a private correctional facility and the originating
jurisdiction, and approved by the Department. Inmates leave Montana only when the
capacity of Montana’s correctional facilities have been exceeded, or when the services
are inadequate for an inmate’s particular needs (i.e., when the inmate needs medical
attention that Montana cannot provide), and the Department contracts with other
jurisdictions to provide those services. The Legislature has not authorized any facility or
other unit of government to engage in the interstate transport of convicted felons, for the
reasons discussed above.
[P31] Thus, the only federal or out-of-state inmates allowed by Mont. Code Ann. § 7-322203 would be those whose confinement is authorized by subsections (1) to (3) (persons
committed in order to secure their attendance as witnesses in criminal trial; persons
charged with crime and committed for trial; and persons committed for contempt or upon
civil process or by other authority of law). The duration of these confinements would
presumably be short-term, which is consistent with the nature and function of a county
jail or local detention facility, and would not breach the Legislature’s overall intent, or

Ms. Rebecca A. Convery
December 3, 2007
Page 12
the statutory restrictions on the long-term confinement of out-of-state inmates in
Montana.
THEREFORE, IT IS MY OPINION:
A multijurisdictional detention center may contract for the confinement of
out-of-state and federal inmates only for the purposes authorized by Mont. Code
Ann. § 7-32-2203, which do not include confinement of adult felony and
misdemeanor offenders who are committed by an out-of-state jurisdiction or the
federal government. That authority has been reserved to the Department of
Corrections, under narrow circumstances only, which evidences a legislative intent
not to allow routine interstate exchange of inmates in and out of Montana.
Very truly yours,

MIKE McGRATH
Attorney General
mm/jma/jym