State v. Jensen
Decision Date | 05 August 1985 |
Docket Number | No. 84-538,84-538 |
Citation | 704 P.2d 45,217 Mont. 272,42 St.Rep. 1191 |
Parties | STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Delbert JENSEN, Defendant and Respondent. |
Court | Montana Supreme Court |
Mike Greely, Atty. Gen., James Scheier, argued, Asst. Atty. Gen., Helena, Ronald W. Smith, Co. Atty., Edward Corrigan, Deputy Co. Atty., Havre, for plaintiff and appellant.
Law Offices of Frank Altman, Ivan Evilsizer, argued, Havre, for defendant and respondent.
The State appeals from a pre-trial order suppressing evidence seized in a search of Delbert Jensen's home by law enforcement officers with a search warrant. The District Court determined that the Justice of the Peace issued the warrant without probable cause. We find that the application contained sufficient probable cause to support the issuance of the search warrant. We reverse the order of the District Court.
The issues on appeal are:
1. Was the search warrant based upon probable cause?
2. If not, should the illegally seized evidence be admissible under the "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule?
On April 24, 1984, Hill County Deputy Sheriff Mark Stolen applied to Justice of the Peace Edward G. Vasecka, Jr., for a search warrant for a trailer at 936 2nd Street North, Havre, Montana. Deputy Stolen's affidavit in support of the application set forth the following:
Neighborhood kids also told her this 'dope dealer' bought his drugs from people on 2nd Street North.
Based upon Deputy Stolen's application and supporting affidavit, the Justice of the Peace issued a search warrant for defendant's trailer. No other sworn testimony or evidence was presented to the Justice of the Peace prior to issuance of the warrant.
On April 27, 1984, Hill County Deputy Sheriffs, Havre City Police and officials from the State Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks searched defendant's residence. They seized more than 60 grams of marijuana, drug paraphernalia, cocaine and a rifle. Defendant Jensen was arrested and charged with theft, criminal sale of dangerous drugs (marijuana), criminal possession of dangerous drugs (marijuana), criminal possession of paraphernalia, and criminal possession of dangerous drugs (cocaine). He pled not guilty to each count.
Defense counsel filed a motion to suppress all of the evidence seized during the search based upon lack of sufficient facts in the application to show probable cause for issuance of the warrant. Following a hearing on the motion and relying solely on the information contained within the four corners of the application, the District Court found a lack of probable cause and granted defendant's motion. The State appeals.
To determine whether there was probable cause to issue the search warrant, we must look only at the information contained in the four corners of the application. State v. Isom (1982), 196 Mont. 330, 641 P.2d 417. The test for determining whether an informant's tip establishes probable cause for issuance of a search warrant is the "totality of the circumstances" test set forth in Illinois v. Gates (1983), 462 U.S. 213, 238-39, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 2332, 76 L.Ed.2d 527:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Barnaby
...law,2 probable cause exists for the issuance of a search warrant, see Kelly, 205 Mont. at 440, 668 P.2d at 1045; State v. Jensen (1985), 217 Mont. 272, 276, 704 P.2d 45, 47. ¶ 87 Unique to our analysis under this approach, however, is the fact that "Montana has a strong tradition of respect......
-
State v. Tuttle
...v. State , 467 So.2d 940, 941 (Miss. 1985) ; State v. Hosier , 454 S.W.3d 883, 892 n.6, 894 (Mo. 2015) (en banc); State v. Jensen , 217 Mont. 272, 704 P.2d 45, 47 (1985) ; State v. Ildefonso , 262 Neb. 672, 634 N.W.2d 252, 261–62 (2001) ; Barrett v. State , 105 Nev. 361, 775 P.2d 1276, 1277......
-
State v. Cotterell
...Mont. 139, ¶ 7, 959 P.2d 503, ¶ 7, overruled in part by State v. Kuneff, 1998 MT 287, 291 Mont. 474, 970 P.2d 556; State v. Jensen, 217 Mont. 272, 276, 704 P.2d 45, 47 (1985)). ¶ 58 "Probable cause exists when the facts and circumstances presented would warrant an honest belief in the mind ......
-
State v. Crowder
...of the circumstances" test set forth in Illinois v. Gates (1983), 462 U.S. 213, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527. State v. Jensen (1985), 217 Mont. 272, 704 P.2d 45. The duty of the reviewing court is to ensure that the magistrate had a " 'substantial basis' " to conclude that probable cause ......