323 P.3d 891
Mont.2014Background
- Fischer pled guilty in 2011 to two counts of distribution of dangerous drugs and received deferred sentences subject to probation conditions.
- Probation conditions required reporting prescriptions, taking medications as prescribed, notifying officers of prescriptions, and permitting home visits or searches on reasonable suspicion.
- In June 2012 Fischer reported job loss; probation officer attempted contact; Fischer did not promptly respond, prompting a home visit with a medication check (pill count).
- During the visit, Officer Watson observed potential mismanagement of prescriptions and proceeded to inspect medications after a pill count; Fischer admitted she had pills belonging to her brother and that more pills were hidden at home.
- A search of Fischer’s purse revealed additional pills; a petition to revoke the deferred sentence was filed; Fischer moved to suppress the resulting evidence, which the district court denied.
- This appeal challenges whether the probation search and the pill-count were lawful and whether the purse search violated the Fourth Amendment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether pill count is a search under probation terms. | Fischer argues pill count invades privacy. | State asserts no search given probation supervision. | Pill count not a search under probation conditions. |
| Whether there was reasonable suspicion to search Fischer's purse. | Fischer contends lack of reasonable suspicion. | State asserts evolving suspicion based on conduct and reports. | Reasonable suspicion supported the purse search. |
| Whether probation search doctrine permits warrantless searches with reasonable suspicion. | Defendant retains standard protections. | Probation framework allows searches with reasonable suspicion. | Probation search upheld under diminished privacy and reasonable suspicion. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Moody, 334 Mont. 517, 148 P.3d 662 (Mont. 2006) (probation home visits may lead to searches with reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Burke, 235 Mont. 165, 766 P.2d 254 (Mont. 1988) (probation officers may supervise and search to ensure compliance)
- State v. Small, 235 Mont. 309, 767 P.2d 316 (Mont. 1989) (probation condition permitting searches with reasonable suspicion)