State v. Driscoll, 303 P.3d 788

The State of Montana appeals a Beaverhead County District Court order suppressing Driscoll's statements to two Dillon Police officers.
Officers observed Driscoll holding a beer can in a bar during a Labor Day rodeo weekend and believed he was under 21.
Driscoll refused to provide identification when asked his age; he also gave a false name and birthdate.
Officers arrested Driscoll after his true identity was later confirmed, revealing he was under 21.
Driscoll was charged with minor in possession and obstructing a peace officer; suppression of statements was granted at the City Court level and appealed.
The District Court affirmed suppression on the ground that the officers exceeded the scope of their authority under § 46-5-401, MCA, while the State appealed the outcome regarding whether prosecution should proceed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officers had particularized suspicion to stop Driscoll	State argues the beer, underage appearance, and rodeo setting gave suspicion	Driscoll contends there was no articulable reason to continued questioning beyond age	Yes, officers had particularized suspicion
Whether taking Driscoll outside the bar violated 46-5-401	State contends outside questioning was within investigation scope	Driscoll argues taking outside exceeded permissible scope	Yes, officers exceeded scope; suppression affirmed on that basis
Whether the questioned conduct violated Driscoll's right against self-incrimination	State sought admission of statements; self-incrimination claim argued	Driscoll asserts violation of rights from questioning	Not reached/affirmed dismissal based on scope before addressing self-incrimination

State v. Fisher, 313 Mont. 274, 60 P.3d 1004 (2002 MT 335) (totality of circumstances governs particularized suspicion)
State v. Jones, 333 Mont. 294, 142 P.3d 851 (2006 MT 209) (two-step review of suppression rulings; factual findings reviewed for clear error)