City of Missoula v. Moore
2011 MT 61
Mont.2011Background
- Moore pled no contest to DUI per se in Missoula Municipal Court, reserving right to appeal denial of suppression motion.
- District Court affirmed the Municipal Court’s denial of Moore’s suppression appeal.
- Laurie called 911 reporting Moore, intoxicated, possibly heading to Reserve Street in a red Blazer; provided Laurie’s identity and location.
- Kurt also called 911, followed Moore, described Moore’s drinking and concerns for safety; provided his identity.
- Officer Adams stopped Kurt for speeding, learned from dispatch of an intoxicated driver matching Moore, then stopped Moore and arrested her for DUI.
- Moore moved to suppress; Municipal Court admitted 911 transcripts; Moore stipulated to their admission; she objected generally at hearing but not to transcripts specifically.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Moore preserved an objection to the 911 transcripts on appeal | Moore preserved via broad objection to evidence beyond stop scope | District Court erred by not considering transcripts as raised on appeal | No preservation; objection not preserved and transcripts properly considered |
| Whether there was substantial evidence of particularized suspicion to justify the stop | Informants’ reports insufficient for particularized suspicion | Informants’ reports plus officer observations establish particularized suspicion | Substantial evidence supports particularized suspicion justifying the stop |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Pratt, 286 Mont. 156 (1997) (three-part Pratt test for informant reliability)
- State v. Clawson, 2009 MT 228 (2009) (particularized suspicion and Pratt factors applied to informants)
- State v. Rutherford, 2009 MT 154 (2009) (vehicle stops require particularized suspicion; totality of circumstances)
- State v. Martinez, 2003 MT 65 (2003) (reliability of citizen informants identified by name and credibility)
- State v. Myhre, 2005 MT 278 (2005) (informant reliability and self-identification indicators)
- State v. Williamson, 1998 MT 199 (1998) (informant reports may be based on what others told him)
- State v. Reiner, 2003 MT 243 (2003) (informant's personal observations matter for reliability)
- State v. Lee, 282 Mont. 391 (1997) (distinguishes anonymous reports from reliable informants)
- State v. Ankeny, 2010 MT 224 (2010) (motion in limine; specificity of grounds required)
- State v. LaFreniere, 2008 MT 99 (2008) (general objections do not preserve issues for appeal)