State v. Morse

2006 MT 54 (2006) · Supreme Court of Montana · March 14, 2006 · No. No. 04-856

Summary

The Supreme Court of Montana affirmed the denial of Bridgette Morse's motion to suppress evidence obtained through a search warrant. The court held that, considering the totality of the circumstances, including informant reports, criminal histories, an electric scale box, and the odor of marijuana, the warrant application established probable cause to search Morse's apartment.

Court
Supreme Court of Montana
Writing for the Court
Justice John Warner; Chief Justice Karla M. Gray; Justice Patricia Cotter; Justice Brian Morris; Justice Jim Rice
Jurisdiction
Montana
Decision date
March 14, 2006
Docket number
No. 04-856
Procedural posture
Morse appealed from the denial of her motion to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant. She entered a conditional guilty plea reserving the right to appeal the suppression ruling.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviews a denial of a motion to suppress first for clear error in the district court's factual findings and then for correctness of the district court's application of law. For a warrant-based search, it reviews whether the issuing magistrate had a substantial basis for finding probable cause, considering only the information within the four corners of the warrant application and the totality of the circumstances, while giving great deference to the magistrate's determination.
Precedential value
Published Montana Supreme Court opinion
Parties
Bridgette Morse v. State of Montana
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

suppression of evidenceprobable causewarrant requirementsearch and seizureappellate procedure

Practice areas

Criminal procedureSearch and seizureEvidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the search-warrant application established probable cause to search Morse's apartment.

Holdings

  1. The search-warrant application established probable cause when considered as a whole under the totality of the circumstances. The district court therefore correctly denied Morse's motion to suppress.

Key quotations

Since the evidence at issue was gathered pursuant to a search warrant, we review whether the magistrate issuing the search warrant had a substantial basis to determine the existence of probable cause. (¶ 12)
When considering the odor of marijuana along with these other facts, we conclude that the search warrant application established probable cause, and the District Court did not err in denying Morse's motion to suppress. (¶ 18)

Factual background

Multiple informants reported that Morse was distributing drugs from her apartment, including an anonymous caller who reported frequent visitors and drug sales in the presence of Morse's juvenile daughter. During a home visit, officers smelled marijuana, observed an empty electric digital scale box, and noted that Morse and four other occupants had drug-related criminal histories. After Morse refused consent to a bedroom search without a warrant, an officer obtained a warrant, which led to the discovery of methamphetamine, marijuana, alprazolam, a digital scale, and sandwich bags.

Procedural history

The State charged Morse with several drug-related and child-welfare offenses. The Twelfth Judicial District Court, Hill County, denied her motion to suppress by written order. Morse then pleaded guilty to criminal possession of dangerous drugs and criminal possession of drug paraphernalia under a plea agreement reserving her suppression appeal rights, was sentenced, and appealed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…