State v. Graham, No. 95-005
| Docket Nº | No. 95-005 |
| Citation | 271 Mont. 510, 898 P.2d 1206 |
| Case Date | June 27, 1995 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Montana |
Page 1206
v.
Laura Mavis GRAHAM, Defendant and Appellant.
Decided June 27, 1995.
Page 1207
[271 Mont. 511] Marcia M. Jacobson, Missoula County Public Defenders Office, Missoula, for appellant.
Joseph P. Mazurek, Atty. Gen., Kathy Seeley, Asst. Atty. Gen., Helena, Robert L. "Dusty" Deschamps III, Missoula County Atty., Karen M. Townsend, Deputy County Atty., Missoula, for respondent.
HUNT, Justice.
Appellant Laura Mavis Graham appeals from an order of the Fourth Judicial District Court, Missoula County, denying her motion to suppress evidence gathered without a search warrant.
We reverse.
The dispositive issue on appeal is:
Did the District Court err in denying appellant's motion to suppress evidence seized from her purse following her arrest?
Appellant was a passenger in a car which was stopped by Deputy Estill in a Safeway parking lot in Missoula. Upon discovering that the driver had a suspended driver's license, Estill arrested the driver and called for backup. It was also discovered that there were outstanding warrants against appellant. Deputy Hintz responded to Estill's call for backup and arrested appellant on the outstanding warrants. A neighbor was contacted to retrieve the car. Deputy Tillman agreed to stay with the car until the neighbor arrived.
[271 Mont. 512] Appellant asked that her purse be left in the car because it contained food stamps that her children would need. Tillman went back to the car and retrieved appellant's purse which he gave to Hintz to take to the station. Narcotics were discovered in appellant's purse when it was searched at the jail without a warrant. Appellant was charged with criminal possession of dangerous drugs under § 45-9-102, MCA.
Appellant filed a motion to suppress all evidence obtained as a result of the warrantless search of her purse. The District Court denied appellant's motion. Appellant reserved her right to appeal the suppression issue and entered a guilty plea to criminal possession of dangerous drugs under § 45-9-102, MCA. Appellant was found guilty of the charged offense and received a deferred sentence. It is from the District Court's judgment that appellant appeals.
Did the District Court err in denying appellant's motion to suppress evidence seized from her purse following her arrest?
We review a district court's ruling on a motion...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Scheetz, No. 96-358
...a motion to suppress to determine whether the court's interpretation and application of the law is correct. See State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1207-08; State v. Stubbs (1995), 270 Mont. 364, 368, 892 P.2d 547, The use of drug-detecting canines to inspect luggage ......
-
State v. Hardaway, No. 99-626.
...the federal Fourth Amendment. Elison, ¶ 46. ¶ 36 Warrantless searches are per se unreasonable under Montana law. State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1208. A warrantless seizure of evidence, however, may be permissible if it falls under one of the few carefully drawn e......
-
State v. Boyer, No. 00-183.
...the federal counter-part cases are not cited) these exceptions include: a search incident to a lawful arrest, State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1208; evidence in plain view, (though listed as an "exception" there really is no constitutional search or seizure where t......
-
State v. Hubbel, No. 96-663
...denial of a motion to suppress is whether the court's interpretation and application of the law is correct. State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1207-08. We review the court's findings of fact to determine whether they are clearly erroneous and whether those findings w......
-
State v. Scheetz, No. 96-358
...a motion to suppress to determine whether the court's interpretation and application of the law is correct. See State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1207-08; State v. Stubbs (1995), 270 Mont. 364, 368, 892 P.2d 547, The use of drug-detecting canines to inspect luggage ......
-
State v. Hardaway, No. 99-626.
...the federal Fourth Amendment. Elison, ¶ 46. ¶ 36 Warrantless searches are per se unreasonable under Montana law. State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1208. A warrantless seizure of evidence, however, may be permissible if it falls under one of the few carefully drawn e......
-
State v. Boyer, No. 00-183.
...the federal counter-part cases are not cited) these exceptions include: a search incident to a lawful arrest, State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1208; evidence in plain view, (though listed as an "exception" there really is no constitutional search or seizure where t......
-
State v. Hubbel, No. 96-663
...denial of a motion to suppress is whether the court's interpretation and application of the law is correct. State v. Graham (1995), 271 Mont. 510, 512, 898 P.2d 1206, 1207-08. We review the court's findings of fact to determine whether they are clearly erroneous and whether those findings w......