State v. K. Nelson
2017 MT 237
| Mont. | 2017Background
- On July 25, 2015, a restaurant waitress (Saunders) called 911 while a coworker (Sharbono) watched a visibly intoxicated man stumble, get into a van, and drive away; Saunders gave her name, workplace, vehicle description, and said both would sign a complaint.
- Montana Highway Patrol Trooper Luke Burson received dispatch, located the van ~11 minutes later in a hotel parking lot, activated lights, contacted driver Kyle Nelson, smelled alcohol, and arrested him for DUI.
- Nelson moved to suppress evidence of the stop in Justice Court, which granted the motion; the State appealed to District Court, which reviewed de novo and denied suppression after an evidentiary hearing.
- Nelson entered a nolo contendere plea reserving the right to appeal the denial of the suppression motion.
- The narrow legal question: whether the citizen informant tip provided particularized suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory stop under Montana law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was supported by particularized suspicion based on a citizen informant tip | The tip was reliable under the Pratt factors (informant identified, based on personal observation, corroborated by officer) and thus justified the stop | The tip was unreliable: Saunders didn’t personally observe all conduct, or wasn’t properly identified; Pratt factors not met, so Burson lacked particularized suspicion | Affirmed: Pratt factors satisfied (Saunders identified herself and would sign complaint; report was based on contemporaneous personal observations; officer corroborated vehicle/location), so particularized suspicion existed and suppression was denied |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Pratt, 286 Mont. 156 (1997) (adopted three-factor test for citizen-informant reliability)
- State v. Clawson, 351 Mont. 354 (2009) (discussed application of Pratt factors)
- City of Missoula v. Moore, 360 Mont. 22 (2011) (explained assessing personal-observation indicia and totality of circumstances)
- State v. Gill, 364 Mont. 182 (2012) (standard of review and evaluating particularized suspicion under totality of circumstances)
- State v. Zietlow, 388 Mont. 26 (2017) (held contemporaneous relay of another’s observations by caller can satisfy Pratt personal-observation factor)