Montana
Montana Squatters Rights and Adverse Possession Laws (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 18, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 18, 2026. · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Montana law sets one of the strictest adverse possession thresholds in the western United States: a squatter must occupy land continuously for five years and pay every state, county, and municipal property tax assessed against that parcel during the entire five-year period before any claim can ripen under Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-411.
Information last verified on May 27, 2026. This article provides general legal information, not legal advice.
Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Montana state law only. For a comparison of squatter and adverse possession rules across all 50 states, see the national squatters rights guide.
Adverse Possession in Montana: Period, Taxes, and Elements
The Governing Statute
Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-411 provides that adverse possession may not be considered established "unless it shall be shown that the land has been occupied and claimed for a period of 5 years continuously and the party or persons, their predecessors, and grantors have during such period paid all the taxes, state, county, or municipal, which have been legally levied and assessed upon said land." Occupancy and tax payment are both statutory requirements. Missing either one defeats the claim entirely.
A separate statute, Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-401, sets the matching limitations rule on the owner's side: an action to recover real property may not be maintained unless the plaintiff, or the plaintiff's ancestor, predecessor, or grantor, was seized or possessed of the property in question within five years before the action was commenced.
Montana courts have consistently applied this dual requirement. A claimant who possesses the land for five years but fails to pay taxes cannot acquire title. Likewise, a claimant who pays taxes but whose possession falls short of five years cannot prevail.

The Five Common-Law Elements
In addition to the statutory period and tax requirement, Montana courts require that possession be:
Actual. For the ordinary squatter, who holds no written instrument, Montana does not apply an open-ended common-law test here. Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-410 provides that land is deemed to have been possessed and occupied "in the following cases only: (1) where it has been protected by a substantial enclosure; (2) where it has been usually cultivated or improved." That list is exclusive. Fencing the parcel or farming and improving it qualifies; generically maintaining the land, visiting it, or storing equipment on it does not. A claimant who entered under a written instrument, judgment, or decree has the broader set of qualifying acts in § 70-19-408 instead, which also counts unenclosed land used for fuel, fencing timber, husbandry, or pasturage.
Open and notorious. The use must be visible and obvious to a reasonable owner who inspects the property. A squatter who conceals their presence cannot satisfy this element. Courts ask whether the true owner had constructive notice of the adverse claim.
Exclusive. The claimant must hold the property to the exclusion of the true owner and the general public. Shared use between the claimant and the true owner interrupts exclusivity.
Hostile. In Montana, hostile means the claimant holds the property without the owner's permission and under a claim of right. A permissive occupant such as a licensee or tenant cannot establish hostility unless the permission is clearly revoked and the claimant thereafter holds in a manner inconsistent with the permission.
Continuous. Possession must be unbroken for the full five years. Seasonal use can satisfy continuity if it mirrors how an owner would typically use the type of land involved, but abandonment restarts the clock.

No Color-of-Title Shortcut
Several states allow a shorter adverse possession period when the claimant holds under color of title, that is, a facially valid but legally defective deed or instrument. Montana has no separate color-of-title provision that reduces the statutory period below five years. The five-year plus tax rule applies regardless of whether the claimant holds a defective deed or no deed at all.
Montana does, however, run two distinct statutory tracks, and which one applies changes how much land a claim can reach and what counts as possessing it. A claimant who entered under a written instrument, judgment, or decree is governed by Mont. Code Ann. §§ 70-19-407 and 70-19-408: that claimant is deemed to hold the entire tract described in the instrument, a known farm or single lot that has been partly improved is treated as occupied in full, and unenclosed land can still qualify if it has been used for the supply of fuel or fencing timber, for husbandry, or for pasturage. A claimant with no such instrument is governed by §§ 70-19-409 and 70-19-410, which reach only "the land so actually occupied and no other."
Tacking
Montana recognizes tacking, the practice of adding the adverse possession period of a prior claimant to one's own, provided there is privity between the two parties. The privity that matters runs between successive adverse possessors: someone who takes over the prior occupant's possessory interest, by conveyance, inheritance, or another transfer of that possession, can add the predecessor's time to their own to reach the five-year threshold. A person who buys the record title from the true owner is on the opposite side of the claim and cannot tack an adverse occupant's time; that buyer is the party the running claim is asserted against. Tacking does not eliminate the tax-payment requirement either, and § 70-19-411 is explicit that the claimant, their predecessors, and their grantors must have paid the taxes throughout the combined period.
Good-Faith Encroachments
Where a structure such as a fence, wall, or building encroaches on neighboring land due to a good-faith mistake about the boundary, Montana courts have recognized equitable relief in some circumstances. However, the encroachment doctrine does not waive the five-year period or the tax requirement for a formal adverse possession claim.
How to Remove a Squatter in Montana
Step 1: Confirm There Is No Rental Relationship
Before filing any court action, a property owner should determine whether the occupant is a former tenant, a buyer under a land contract, or a stranger with no prior agreement. The removal process differs depending on that relationship.
A former tenant whose lease has expired or been terminated is covered by the Montana Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, Mont. Code Ann. § 70-24-101 et seq. The owner must give written notice (the required notice period depends on the type of tenancy and the reason for termination) before filing a court action.
A stranger who entered without any agreement has no tenancy rights and can be removed under the general Forcible Entry and Detainer statute, Mont. Code Ann. § 70-27-101 et seq., with no prior tenancy notice required.

Step 2: Do Not Use Self-Help
Montana law prohibits self-help eviction. An owner who changes the locks, removes the occupant's belongings, shuts off utilities, or physically removes the person without a court order exposes themselves to civil liability. The only lawful path is through the courts.
Step 3: File a Forcible Entry and Detainer (FED) Action
For occupants who entered without permission, the owner files a FED complaint in the county where the property is located. Under Mont. Code Ann. § 70-27-101(2), the district court of the county in which the property or some part of it is situated has jurisdiction over these proceedings, and justices' courts have concurrent jurisdiction within their respective counties. Justice court is often the faster and cheaper option for a straightforward possession case, but it is subject to the monetary limits on that court's jurisdiction, so an owner also seeking damages above those limits should file in district court. Under § 70-27-101 et seq., the plaintiff must establish that the defendant entered or holds the property without right or has held over after the termination of a lawful tenancy. The court sets a hearing, typically within a few days of service.
If the occupant does not appear or the court rules for the owner, the court issues a writ of restitution directing the sheriff or constable to restore possession to the owner. The occupant is given a brief window to remove personal belongings before the writ is executed.
Step 4: Coordinate with the Sheriff
The sheriff's office, not the property owner, carries out the physical removal. The owner delivers the writ of restitution to the sheriff and pays any required fee. The sheriff posts notice and, after the notice period, removes the occupant and their property.
Step 5: Document Everything
Throughout the process, the owner should document the condition of the property with photographs and written records, keep copies of all court filings and orders, and preserve any evidence of damage for a later civil claim.
Trespasser vs. Squatter vs. Holdover Tenant
Montana law treats these categories differently in practice. A trespasser who entered recently and has no claim of occupancy can sometimes be removed by calling law enforcement under the criminal trespass statute, Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-203, if the occupant refuses to leave after being told to do so. Law enforcement may or may not treat it as a criminal matter depending on how long the person has been present and whether there is any indicia of residency. For occupants who have been present long enough to establish apparent residency, the civil FED route is the reliable path.
The 2025 Unlawful Squatting Law
Montana enacted Senate Bill 101 in 2025 (Chapter 179, Laws of Montana 2025), codified at Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-206. The law creates a standalone misdemeanor offense of unlawful squatting: knowingly entering and residing on another's premises without the consent of the owner, rightful occupant, or an authorized representative. Under the statute, law enforcement may immediately remove a person who commits unlawful squatting from the premises, and a convicted squatter must pay restitution equal to the fair market rent for the duration of the unauthorized occupancy. The law also treats presenting false authorization documents as forgery and damaging property during the occupation as criminal mischief. This gives Montana property owners a faster, law-enforcement-administered path in addition to the civil FED procedure under § 70-27-101 et seq.
Legal disclaimer: This article is general legal information about Montana law and is not legal advice. Laws change, and individual circumstances vary. If you are a property owner dealing with an unauthorized occupant, or an occupant facing removal, consult a licensed Montana attorney before taking action.
For how other states handle these same issues, see the national squatters rights guide.
Article by the RecordingLaw.com editorial team. Last reviewed May 27, 2026.
More Montana Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How long does a squatter need to stay in Montana to claim adverse possession?
Five years of continuous possession, plus payment of all state, county, and municipal taxes on the property throughout that entire period, as required by Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-411. Both elements are mandatory.
Does Montana have a color-of-title rule that shortens the adverse possession period?
No, nothing shortens the five-year period, and the tax-payment requirement of Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-411 applies to every claim. But Montana does have a color-of-title track, and the difference matters. A claimant occupying under a written instrument, judgment, or decree falls under §§ 70-19-407 and 70-19-408: that claimant is treated as holding the whole tract described in the instrument, a known farm or single lot that is partly improved counts in full, and land can qualify through use for fuel, fencing timber, husbandry, or pasturage even if it is not enclosed. A claimant without such an instrument falls under §§ 70-19-409 and 70-19-410: possession counts only where the land has been protected by a substantial enclosure or usually cultivated or improved, and only as to the land actually occupied.
Can a squatter claim adverse possession if they did not pay the property taxes?
No. Tax payment is a statutory prerequisite under § 70-19-411. A claimant who possessed the land for five years but failed to pay all assessed taxes cannot acquire title by adverse possession.
How does a Montana property owner remove a squatter legally?
The owner files a Forcible Entry and Detainer (FED) action under Mont. Code Ann. § 70-27-101 et seq. in the county where the property is located. Section 70-27-101(2) gives the district court of that county jurisdiction, with justices' courts holding concurrent jurisdiction within their counties, so either forum can hear a straightforward possession case while a claim exceeding justice-court monetary limits belongs in district court. After a hearing and a court order, the sheriff executes a writ of restitution to remove the occupant. Self-help removal is illegal.
Can I call the police to remove a squatter from my Montana property?
Possibly, if the occupant entered recently and there is no indicia of residency, law enforcement may treat it as criminal trespass under Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-203. For occupants who have been present long enough to establish apparent residency, the civil FED procedure is the reliable legal remedy.
Does Montana have a new squatter law passed in 2024 or 2025?
Yes. Montana enacted SB 101 in 2025, codified at Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-206, which creates the offense of unlawful squatting and lets law enforcement immediately remove a squatter from the premises, in addition to the existing civil FED process under § 70-27-101 et seq. A convicted squatter must also pay restitution equal to the fair market rent for the occupancy period.
What is the difference between a squatter and a holdover tenant in Montana?
A holdover tenant once had a legal rental agreement; removal requires written notice and compliance with the Montana Residential Landlord and Tenant Act (Mont. Code Ann. § 70-24-101 et seq.) before filing in court. A squatter entered without any agreement and can be removed directly through a FED action with no prior tenancy notice required.
Updates
Corrected the text quoted for Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-411, which had reproduced § 70-19-401 instead; added Montana's two statutory adverse possession tracks (§§ 70-19-407 to 70-19-410) in place of the incorrect statement that the state has no color-of-title track; limited the actual-possession element to the substantial-enclosure or cultivation-or-improvement cases § 70-19-410 allows; stated that district courts have Forcible Entry and Detainer jurisdiction with justice courts concurrent under § 70-27-101(2); and corrected the tacking discussion, which had described a record-title buyer rather than a successor adverse possessor.
Corrected a false claim that Montana has no expedited squatter-removal law: Montana enacted SB 101 in 2025 (Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-206), which lets law enforcement immediately remove an unlawful squatter and requires restitution. Also fixed four dead Montana statute citation links (the legislature moved its code site to a new domain).
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Montana Code Annotated, Title 70
§ 70-19-411Occupancy And Payment Of Taxes Necessary To Prove Adverse PossessionIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
70-19-411. Occupancy and payment of taxes necessary to prove adverse possession. In no case shall adverse possessions be considered established under this code unless it shall be shown that the land has been occupied and claimed for a period of 5 years continuously and the party or persons, their predecessors, and grantors have during such period paid all the taxes, state, county, or municipal, which have been legally levied and assessed upon said land.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 28 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Tester rejected adverse possession because the claimants did not prove they paid taxes on the disputed parcel. Tungsten held § 70-19-411 does not require taxes not yet due when the five-year period ends and that redeeming back taxes can count; Parker satisfied the section and acquired title.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lindey's, Inc. v. Goodover (Montana Supreme Court 1994, 264 Mont. 489)✓A company claimed a surveyed strip as "no man’s land" and intended to pay taxes. The court rejected that theory: it had never possessed the strip or paid its taxes as § 70-19-411 required, so summary judgment against its title claim was proper.
- Tester v. Tester (Montana Supreme Court 2000, 300 Mont. 5)✓Claimants sought a strip between a county road and a state highway, but the tax records did not show which road defined the assessed land. The court held they failed to prove taxes on the disputed parcel and reversed their adverse-possession judgment.
- Slauson v. BERTELSEN FAMILY TRUST NEIL BERTELSEN (Montana Supreme Court 2006, 335 Mont. 43)“…n had paid taxes on the pie-shaped property as required by § 70-19-411, MCA, Bertelsen did not acquire the property…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: How to Charge Someone With Trespassing
§ 70-27-101Application And JurisdictionIn force
70-27-101. Application and jurisdiction. (1) This chapter, except as it relates to forcible detainer as defined in 70-27-103(2) only and as it relates to forcible entry, does not apply to arrangements governed by chapter 24 of this title. (2) The district court of the county in which the property or some part of it is situated shall have jurisdiction of proceedings under this chapter, provided that justices' courts, within their respective counties, shall have concurrent jurisdiction.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2017
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Kootenai Corp. v. Dayton (Montana Supreme Court 1979, 184 Mont. 19)“…detainer statutes, S93-9701, R.C.M. 1947, et seq. [now section 70-27-101, MCA, et seq.], are brought into operation i…”
- Citibank v. Slagter (Montana Supreme Court 2017, 2017 MT 103N)“…sion of real property located in Montana is a civil matter. Section 70-27-101, MCA. The District Court had jurisdiction.…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 70-24-101Short TitleIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
70-24-101. Short title. This chapter may be cited as "The Montana Residential Landlord and Tenant Act of 1977".
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Kunst v. Pass (Montana Supreme Court 1998, 288 Mont. 264)“…ence and not under the Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, § 70-24-101, MCA, et seq. It thus concluded that the att…”
- Mathes v. Adams (Montana Supreme Court 1992, 254 Mont. 347)“…sidential Landlord and Tenant Actf1 (the Act) in 1977. Sections 70-24-101, MCA et seq. The purpose of the Act is…”
- Weik v. Asby (District Court, D. Montana 2024)“…et seq., and the Montana Residential Landlord Tenant Act, Mont. Code Ann. § 70-24-101 et seq. (Count 2); wrongful discharge…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Montana Landlord-Tenant Laws (2026): Deposits, Notice, and Tenant Rights
§ 70-19-401Action For Recovery -- Possession Within 5 Years RequiredIn force
70-19-401. Action for recovery -- possession within 5 years required. An action for the recovery of real property or for the possession of real property may not be maintained unless it appears that the plaintiff or the plaintiff's ancestor, predecessor, or grantor was seized or possessed of the property in question within 5 years before the commencement of the action.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 30 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Brimstone Mining, Inc. v. Glaus (Montana Supreme Court 2003, 317 Mont. 236)“…53 and to the present, the statutory period is five years. Section 70-19-401, MCA. The period of prescriptive use by a c…”
- Cook v. Hartman (Montana Supreme Court 2003, 317 Mont. 343)“…t roads for the five-year prescriptive period set forth in § 70-19-401, MCA. The parties briefed the partial summar…”
- Slauson v. BERTELSEN FAMILY TRUST NEIL BERTELSEN (Montana Supreme Court 2006, 335 Mont. 43)“…26 Mont. 334, ¶ 13, 109 P.3d 252, ¶ 13 (citations omitted); § 70-19-401, MCA. Slauson only questions whether the us…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 70-19-407Occupancy Under Claim Founded On Instrument Or Judgment -- When Considered AdverseIn force
70-19-407. Occupancy under claim founded on instrument or judgment -- when considered adverse. When it appears that the occupant or those under whom the occupant claims entered into the possession of the property under claim of title, exclusive of other right, founding the claim upon a written instrument as being a conveyance of the property in question or upon the decree or judgment of a competent court and that there has been a continued occupation and possession of the property included in the instrument, decree, or judgment or of some part of the property under the claim for 5 years, the property included is considered to have been held adversely, except that when the property consists of a tract divided into lots, the possession of one lot is not considered a possession of any other lot of the same tract.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Nelson v. Layne Stuart Davis & Mary Jo Davis of the Layne Stuart Davis & Mary Jo Davis Revocable Trust Dated 8-2-2011 (Montana Supreme Court 2018, 391 Mont. 280)“…ed the Salituros and adversely possessed the Property under § 70-19-407, MCA. The Nelsons argue in the alternative t…”
- CLAYTON BY MURPHY v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (Montana Supreme Court 1986, 221 Mont. 166)“…of-way by adverse possession and/or prescription. Section 70-19-407, MCA, provides in part that where a person…”
- Taylor v. Montana Power Co. (Montana Supreme Court 2002, 312 Mont. 134)“…above, MPC was required to show either color of title under § 70-19-407, MCA, or an enclosure or cultivation as req…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 70-19-408Claim Founded On Instrument Or Judgment -- What Considered Possession And OccupationIn force
70-19-408. Claim founded on instrument or judgment -- what considered possession and occupation. (1) For the purpose of constituting an adverse possession by any person claiming a title founded upon a written instrument or a judgment or decree, land is deemed to have been possessed and occupied in the following cases: (a) where it has been usually cultivated or improved; (b) where it has been protected by a substantial enclosure; (c) where although not enclosed it has been used for the supply of fuel or of fencing timber, either for the purpose of husbandry or for pasturage or for the ordinary use of the occupant. (2) Where a known farm or a single lot has been partly improved, the portion of such farm or lot that has been left not cleared or not enclosed, according to the usual course and custom of the adjoining country, shall be deemed to have been occupied for the same length of time as the part improved and cultivated.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Tungsten Holdings, Inc. v. Parker (Montana Supreme Court 2001, 305 Mont. 329)“…satisfied the criteria for adverse possession pursuant to § 70-19-408, MCA, which provides for adverse possession…”
- Swecker v. Dorn (Montana Supreme Court 1979, 181 Mont. 436)“…er claim of title. Section 93-2509, R.C.M. 1947, now section 70-19-408 MCA, deals with adverse possession acquire…”
- Harding v. Savoy (Montana Supreme Court 2004, 323 Mont. 261)“…tes to Montana’s adverse possession statutes, specifically § 70-19-408, MCA, which provides in part: (1)…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 70-19-409Actual Occupancy Under Claim Of Title Not Founded On Instrument Or Judgment -- AdverseIn force
70-19-409. Actual occupancy under claim of title not founded on instrument or judgment -- adverse. Where it appears that there has been an actual continued occupation of land under a claim of title, exclusive of any other right, but not founded upon a written instrument, judgment, or decree, the land so actually occupied and no other is deemed to have been held adversely.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2002
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Cremer v. Cremer Rodeo Land and Livestock Co. (Montana Supreme Court 1979, 181 Mont. 87)“…rious and adverse use." Section 93-2510, R.C.M. 1947, now section 70-19-409 MCA states: "Where it appears that there…”
- Albert v. Hastetter (Montana Supreme Court 2002, 310 Mont. 82)“…s created by law based on a claim of title by adverse use. Section 70-19-409, MCA. The elements necessary to establish a…”
- Mielke v. Daly Ditches Irrigation D (Montana Supreme Court 1987)“…title not founded on an instrument or judgment. Section 70-19-409, MCA. The difference seems to be that…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 70-19-410Claim Of Title Not Founded On Instrument Or Judgment -- What Considered OccupationIn force
70-19-410. Claim of title not founded on instrument or judgment -- what considered occupation. For the purpose of constituting an adverse possession by a person claiming title not founded upon a written instrument, judgment, or decree, land is deemed to have been possessed and occupied in the following cases only: (1) where it has been protected by a substantial enclosure; (2) where it has been usually cultivated or improved.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2010
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Taylor v. Montana Power Co. (Montana Supreme Court 2002, 312 Mont. 134)“…407, MCA, or an enclosure or cultivation as required under § 70-19-410, MCA. We will address the open and notoriou…”
- Habel v. James (Montana Supreme Court 2003, 315 Mont. 249)“…extent to constitute a possessory interest. ¶17 Section 70-19-410, MCA, provides: For the purpose of c…”
- Stimatz v. State (Montana Supreme Court 1980, 189 Mont. 179)“…o r improved t h e same a s r e q u i r e d by s e c t i o n 70-19-410, MCA, t o uphold a c l a i m of adverse…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Montana Code Annotated, Title 45
§ 45-6-206Unlawful SquattingIn force
45-6-206. Unlawful squatting. (1) A person commits the offense of unlawful squatting when the person knowingly, without the consent of the owner, rightful occupant, or an authorized representative of the owner: (a) enters the premises of another; and (b) resides on the premises for any period of time. (2) A person convicted of unlawful squatting is guilty of a misdemeanor. In addition to the penalties provided in 46-18-212, the person must be ordered to make restitution in an amount equal to the fair market value rent for the duration of the party's occupancy of the premises. (3) A person who knowingly presents a false document purporting to convey authorization to enter and remain on the premises commits the offense of forgery and is subject to the penalties provided in 45-6-325. (4) A person who commits the offense of unlawful squatting and intentionally damages the property commits the offense of criminal mischief and is subject to the penalties provided in 45-6-101. (5) Law enforcement may immediately remove a person who commits the offense of unlawful squatting from the premises.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2016
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Ellsworth (Montana Supreme Court 2016, 386 Mont. 71)“…I: Tampering with Witnesses and Informants, in violation of §45-6-206, MCA, was revoked. The Defendant was sentenc…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 45-6-203Criminal Trespass To PropertyIn force
45-6-203. Criminal trespass to property. (1) Except as provided in 15-7-139, 70-16-111, 76-13-116, and subsection (4) of this section, a person commits the offense of criminal trespass to property if the person knowingly: (a) enters or remains unlawfully in an occupied structure; or (b) enters or remains unlawfully in or upon the premises of another. (2) A person convicted of the offense of criminal trespass to property shall be fined not to exceed $500 or be imprisoned in the county jail for any term not to exceed 6 months, or both. (3) A person convicted of or who forfeits bond or bail for committing an act of criminal trespass must be subject to revocation of the person's privilege to hunt, fish, or trap in this state for up to 24 months from the date of conviction or forfeiture if the trespass occurs on: (a) property owned or administered by the department of fish, wildlife, and parks; or (b) any property, regardless of ownership, if the person is hunting, fishing, trapping, or collecting or attempting to collect antlers, antler sheds, or animal horns.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 22 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Allum (Montana Supreme Court 2005, 327 Mont. 363)“…2002, with criminal trespass to property in violation of § 45-6-203, MCA (2001). The substance of the charge, wr…”
- City of Bozeman v. G. Lehrer, Jr. (Montana Supreme Court 2020, 399 Mont. 166)“…e offense of criminal trespass to property in violation of § 45-6-203, MCA. ¶4 Lehrer moved to dismiss for la…”
- In re K.J. (Montana Supreme Court 2010, 355 Mont. 257)“…le cause that K.J. had satisfied the “knowingly” element of § 45-6-203, MCA. K.J. did not invoke the constitutional…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-411 -- Adverse Possession Period and Tax Requirement(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-27-101 et seq. -- Forcible Entry and Detainer(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-24-101 et seq. -- Montana Residential Landlord and Tenant Act(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-203 -- Criminal Trespass to Property(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-206 — Unlawful Squatting (SB 101, Ch. 179, L. 2025)(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-401 -- Action for Recovery, Possession Within 5 Years Required(mca.legmt.gov)
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-407 -- Occupancy Under Claim Founded on Instrument or Judgment(mca.legmt.gov)
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-408 -- Claim Founded on Instrument or Judgment, What Considered Possession(mca.legmt.gov)
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-409 -- Actual Occupancy Under Claim of Title Not Founded on Instrument(mca.legmt.gov)
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-19-410 -- Claim Not Founded on Instrument, What Considered Occupation(mca.legmt.gov)
- Mont. Code Ann. § 70-27-101 -- Forcible Entry and Detainer, Jurisdiction(mca.legmt.gov)