333 P.3d 218
Mont.2014Background
- Strom and a 16-year-old friend S.J. were in a van at Stodden Park in broad daylight; the only vehicle present drew police notice.
- Sgt. Heard approached the parked van, questioned S.J. for a license, and obtained both women's IDs to check driver status and warrants.
- S.J. lacked a driver’s license; Strom had a warrant from Stillwater County for failure to appear.
- Sgt. Heard arrested Strom based on the outstanding warrant after returning to the vehicle with the IDs.
- Strom later possessed a baggie claimed to contain crystal meth, which tested positive, leading to charges for possession of dangerous drugs.
- Strom moved to suppress the evidence and statements as tainted by an unlawful seizure; the district court denied the motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the District Court err by denying suppression for lack of seizure with particularized suspicion? | State argued no seizure occurred. | Strom argued a seizure requiring particularized suspicion occurred. | Yes, suppression reversed; seizure found and remand for proceedings consistent with opinion. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (U.S. Supreme Court 1980) (framework for determining a seizure based on reasonable person not free to leave)
- State v. Wilkins, 350 Mont. 96 (2009 MT 99) (no seizure where officer did not physically stop or impede movement; later discovery supported by later particularized suspicion)
- State v. Case, 338 Mont. 87 (2007 MT 161) (tests for determining seizure and totality-of-the-circumstances analysis)
- Brown v. State, 349 Mont. 408 (2009 MT 64) (particularized suspicion requires objective data and articulable facts)
- Moore v. State, 313 Mont. 126 (2002 MT 315) (totality-of-the-circumstances approach to seizure analysis)
- State v. Flemings, 344 Mont. 360 (2008 MT 229) (factors weighing information quality and quantity in seizure assessment)