State v. Murray, 2011 MT 10

Murray was stopped after Deputy Cross observed the pickup weaving near Whitehall, Montana, and Murray was identified as the man walking two dogs; the officer followed the truck to assess continuing behavior.
The truck pulled into a church parking lot; Murray exited with dogs and walked away as Cross approached; Murray complied with the officer’s request to return to the truck.
Murray was charged in justice court with DUI Per Se and operating a motor vehicle without liability insurance; a suppression motion was denied in justice court, and again denied by the District Court after a bench trial.
Murray pled guilty conditionally to both DUI Per Se and no-insurance offenses on the condition that he could appeal the suppression denial to the Montana Supreme Court.
The District Court sentenced Murray for the no-insurance offense to six months in jail with all but two days suspended, which was later conceded to be illegal; the Supreme Court remanded for resentencing and addressed suppression and related issues.
The court ultimately affirmed the stop based on probable cause or, alternatively, particularized suspicion, reversed the no-insurance sentence as illegal, and remanded for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the District Court erred in denying Murray’s motion to suppress	Murray contends Yellowstone Trail width and driving conduct did not establish particularized suspicion	Cross had sufficient basis to stop for a traffic violation, §61-8-321, MCA	Stop justified; probable cause or at least particularized suspicion supported the stop
Whether the District Court erred in sentencing Murray for operating without liability insurance	Murray argues the six-month jail sentence exceeds statutory maximum	State concedes illegality of the sentence	Sentence illegal; remanded for resentencing to correct the maximum
Whether the prosecutor erred in recommending a sentence outside the plea agreement	Alternative issue; Murray argues improper sentencing under plea agreement	Prosecutor’s recommendation possibly outside agreement	Not reached; court remands for resentencing, addressing the no-insurance sentence first

State v. Rutherford, 350 Mont. 403, 208 P.3d 389 (2009 MT 154) (standard for suppression findings and applicability of legal standards)
State v. Deines, 351 Mont. 1, 208 P.3d 857 (2009 MT 179) (clear error review of factual findings in suppression context)
State v. Benoit, 310 Mont. 449, 51 P.3d 495 (2002 MT 166) (sentence review for legality within statutory limits)
State v. Heafner, 356 Mont. 128, 231 P.3d 1087 (2010 MT 87) (illegal sentence; remand for resentencing)
State v. Clayton, 309 Mont. 215, 45 P.3d 30 (2002 MT 67) (Montana Supreme Court rejects Hodari D. framework; seizure can occur upon display of authority)
Loney v. State, 322 Mont. 305, 95 P.3d 691 (2004 MT 204) (particularized suspicion standard for investigative stops)
Roberts v. State, 293 Mont. 476, 977 P.2d 974 (1999 MT 59) (seizure occurred when officer blocked vehicle and engaged occupant)
Mendenhall v. United States, 446 U.S. 544, 100 S. Ct. 1870 (1980) (origin of the reasonable person test for seizures)