State v. Lewis, 340 Mont. 10

Summary

The Supreme Court of Montana reviews an interlocutory appeal from orders suppressing evidence obtained during a fire investigation at the defendant's residence. The court holds that exigent circumstances and the plain-view doctrine justified the deputy's second entry and seizure of evidence from a table and bed, but affirms suppression of evidence obtained during later entries undertaken to search for additional evidence. The matter is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Holdings

1. The second entry was lawful because exigent circumstances reasonably supported reentry to prevent fire-suppression efforts from destroying evidence, and the entry was a continuation of the initial lawful entry rather than a detached search.
2. The third and subsequent entries were unlawful because they were separate entries undertaken to search for additional evidence after the fire had been suppressed and the cause and location of the fire had been determined; they required a warrant, consent, or a separate exigency, none of which existed.
3. The plain view doctrine is an exception to the warrant requirement applicable to seizures, not searches. It does not authorize an officer to intrude or proceed to the location of evidence without an independent lawful basis for presence and access.

Questions Presented

1. Whether McCord's second entry to photograph and seize evidence observed in plain view during the initial, exigency-based entry was lawful without a warrant.
2. Whether McCord's third and subsequent entries to search for and gather additional evidence from the kitchen area were lawful without a warrant.
3. Whether the plain view doctrine should be characterized as an exception to the warrant requirement for searches or only for seizures.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded