415 P.3d 473
Mont.2018Background
- In May 2015 Chance Ryan Conley received a three-year deferred sentence for two counts of methamphetamine possession, placed on probation with a condition consenting to searches on reasonable suspicion.
- Conley admitted meth use, tested positive, failed to report regularly, missed treatment court, and a warrant issued for his arrest.
- On July 6, 2015 probation officers found Conley as a front-seat passenger in a vehicle at his last known address; officers detained him and inspected the car after observing "red flags" of drug use.
- An officer spotted a glasses pouch in plain view on the back passenger seat; upon opening it he found needles and a crystal-like substance Conley admitted belonged to him.
- Conley moved to suppress evidence from the vehicle search arguing the car was not his and he lacked authority/control to justify a probationary search; the District Court denied the motion and Conley was convicted on drug charges and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the vehicle search was unlawful under the Montana Constitution and Conley's probation condition | Conley: probation condition authorizes search only of defendant's vehicle; he did not own or have sufficient control over the car so the search was unauthorized | State: probation condition and Admin. R. M. 20.7.1101(7) permit search of person/vehicle when officer has reasonable suspicion; passenger status and observable facts supplied reasonable suspicion and control | Court: affirmed denial of suppression — Conley (a probationer) had a reduced expectation of privacy and, under the facts, no reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle or contents, so no constitutional "search" requiring suppression |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hill, 322 Mont. 165 (2004) (articulates expectation-of-privacy framework and analyzes vehicle searches where defendant lacked ownership)
- State v. Burke, 235 Mont. 165 (1988) (probationers have reduced privacy interests; probationary searches may be based on reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Bullock, 272 Mont. 361 (1995) (automatic standing to challenge searches when charged with possessory offense)
- State v. Parker, 287 Mont. 151 (1998) (passenger charged with possessory offense may challenge search of items found in vehicle)
- State v. McCarthy, 258 Mont. 51 (1993) (passenger non-ownership relevant to expectation of privacy in vehicle)
- Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (1987) (probation search doctrine recognizing special needs and reduced privacy expectations)