Montana

Montana plays Northern Arizona after Whitney's 24-point game

Published

2 years ago

January 13, 2024

Press Room

Montana plays Northern Arizona after Whitney's 24-point game

Northern Arizona Lumberjacks (7-9, 0-2 Big Sky) at Montana Grizzlies (10-6, 1-2 Big Sky)

Missoula, Montana; Saturday, 9 p.m. EST

FANDUEL SPORTSBOOK LINE: Grizzlies -12; over/under is 146.5

BOTTOM LINE: Montana plays the Northern Arizona Lumberjacks after Brandon Whitney scored 24 points in Montana’s 98-92 overtime loss to the Northern Colorado Bears.

The Grizzlies have gone 6-2 at home. Montana leads the Big Sky with 25.8 defensive rebounds per game led by Dischon Thomas averaging 4.5.

The Lumberjacks are 0-2 in Big Sky play. Northern Arizona gives up 76.8 points to opponents while being outscored by 11.2 points per game.

Montana is shooting 47.5% from the field this season, 0.5 percentage points lower than the 48.0% Northern Arizona allows to opponents. Northern Arizona averages 65.6 points per game, 7.5 fewer points than the 73.1 Montana gives up.

The matchup Saturday is the first meeting of the season between the two teams in conference play.

TOP PERFORMERS: Aanen Moody is shooting 45.8% and averaging 15.2 points for the Grizzlies. Thomas is averaging 1.8 made 3-pointers over the last 10 games for Montana.

Trenton McLaughlin is shooting 36.0% from beyond the arc with 2.3 made 3-pointers per game for the Lumberjacks, while averaging 15.1 points. Oakland Fort is shooting 37.8% and averaging 9.6 points over the past 10 games for Northern Arizona.

LAST 10 GAMES: Grizzlies: 8-2, averaging 82.2 points, 36.5 rebounds, 16.6 assists, 4.8 steals and 3.4 blocks per game while shooting 49.5% from the field. Their opponents have averaged 73.6 points per game.

Lumberjacks: 5-5, averaging 67.4 points, 29.1 rebounds, 13.2 assists, 4.9 steals and 2.0 blocks per game while shooting 43.2% from the field. Their opponents have averaged 76.9 points.

The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar.

Source link

Click to comment

Montana

Montana Lottery Powerball, Lotto America results for March 2, 2026

Published

9 hours ago

March 3, 2026

Press Room

The Montana Lottery offers multiple draw games for those aiming to win big.

Here’s a look at March 2, 2026, results for each game:

Winning Powerball numbers from March 2 drawing

02-17-18-38-62, Powerball: 20, Power Play: 2

Check Powerball payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Lotto America numbers from March 2 drawing

03-08-17-24-34, Star Ball: 06, ASB: 02

Check Lotto America payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Big Sky Bonus numbers from March 2 drawing

06-12-19-29, Bonus: 11

Check Big Sky Bonus payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Powerball Double Play numbers from March 2 drawing

21-28-58-65-67, Powerball: 25

Check Powerball Double Play payouts and previous drawings here.

Winning Millionaire for Life numbers from March 2 drawing

28-41-42-50-55, Bonus: 02

Check Millionaire for Life payouts and previous drawings here.

Feeling lucky? Explore the latest lottery news & results

When are the Montana Lottery drawings held?

Powerball: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
Mega Millions: 9 p.m. MT on Tuesday and Friday.
Lucky For Life: 8:38 p.m. MT daily.
Lotto America: 9 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday and Saturday.
Big Sky Bonus: 7:30 p.m. MT daily.
Powerball Double Play: 8:59 p.m. MT on Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday.
Montana Cash: 8 p.m. MT on Wednesday and Saturday.
Millionaire for Life: 9:15 p.m. MT daily.

Missed a draw? Peek at the past week’s winning numbers.

This results page was generated automatically using information from TinBu and a template written and reviewed by a Great Falls Tribune editor. You can send feedback using this form.

Source link

Montana

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate

Published

21 hours ago

March 2, 2026

Press Room

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate

Everyone makes mistakes, even experienced professionals; a good reminder for the rest of us to learn from those mistakes. The motion in State v. Stroup starts off well in its initial pages (no case law hallucinations), but is then followed by several pages of two other motions, which I don’t think the lawyer was planning to file, and which appear to have been AI-generated: It begins with the “Below is concise motion language you can drop into …” language quoted above.

Griffen Smith (Missoulian) reported on the story, and included the prosecutor’s motion to strike that filing, on the grounds that it violates a local rule (3(G)) requiring disclosure of the use of generative AI:

The document does not include a generative artificial intelligence disclosure as required. However, page 7 begins as follows: “Below is concise motion language you can drop into a ‘Motion to Admit Mental-Disease Evidence and for Related Instructions’ keyed to 45-6-204, 45-6-201, and 4614-102. Adjust headings/captions to your local practice.” Page 10 states “Below is a full motion you can paste into your pleading, then adjust names, dates, and styles to fit local practice.” These pages also include several apparent hyperlinks to “ppl-ai-file-upload.s3.amazonaws,” “ppl-ai-fileupload.s3.amazonaws+1,” and others. The document includes what appears to be an attempt at a second case caption on page 12. It is not plausible on its face that any source other than generative AI would have created such language for a filed version of a brief….

There’s more in that filing, but here’s one passage:

While generative AI can be a useful tool for some purposes and may have greater application in the future, when used improperly, and without meaningful review, it can ultimately damage both the perception and the reality of the profession. One assumes that Mr. Stroup has had, or will at some point have, an opportunity to review the filing made on his behalf. What impression could a review of pgs. 12-19 leave upon a defendant who struggles with paranoia and delusional thinking? While AI could theoretically one day become a replacement for portions of staff of experienced attorneys, it is readily apparent that this day has not yet arrived.

The Missoulan article includes this response:

In a Wednesday interview, Office of Public Defender Division Administrator Brian Smith told the Missoulian the AI-generated language was inadvertently included in an unrelated filing. And he criticized the county attorney’s office for filing a “four-page diatribe about the dangers of AI” instead of working with the defense to correct her mistake.
“That’s not helping the client or the case,” Smith said, “and all you are doing is trying to throw a professional colleague under the bus.”

As I mentioned, the lawyer involved seems quite experienced, and ran for the Montana Public Service Commission in 2020 (getting nearly 48% of the vote) and for the House of Representatives in Montana’s first district in 2022 (getting over 46% of the vote) and in 2024 (getting over 44%). “Его пример другим наука,” Pushkin wrote in Eugene Onegin—”May his example profit others,” in the Falen translation.

Thanks to Matthew Monforton for the pointer.

Source link