Case Title: STATE v GRENFELL

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: montana

Court: Montana Supreme Court

Date: 1977-05-11T00:00:00Z

Document:
No. 13165 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA THE STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Respondent, GREGORY ALLEN GRENFELL, Defendant and Appellant. Appeal from: District Court of the Second Judicial District Honorable James D. Freebourn, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: J. Brian Tierney argued, Butte, Montana For Respondent : Hon. Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena, Montana Gary Winston argued, County Attorney, Butte, Montana Nadine Scott argued, Butte, Montana Submitted: January 12, 1 9 7 7 Decided : Filed: - M Y 1 1 . 1977 M r . :Justice Daniel J. Shea delivered the Opinion of the Court. Defendant Gregory Grenfell was convicted on one d four counts of s e l l i n g dangerous drugs i n violation of section 54-132, R.C.M. 1947, i n the d i s t r i c t court, S i l v e r B o w County. He was sentenced t o 10 years i n prison. Defendant r a i s e s several issues i n t h i s appeal but only the issue of entrapment i s necessary f o r the decision i n t h i s case. He claims there was entrapment a s a matter of law. W e agree. The charges against Grenfell arose i n Butte, Montana, from four s a l e s of drugs t o B i l l Verrall, an informer f o r the Silver Bow County s h e r i f f ' s department, on January 26, 27, 28, and 29, 1975. Grenfell and Verrall met i n the f a l l of 1974. Thereafter Verrall and h i s wife cultivated a close friendship with Grenfell and h i s wife. The f a c t s show Verrall was a f r u s t r a t e d and u n f u l f i l l e d policeman having d r i f t e d from job t o job over a period of several years. He s t a r t e d a s a Montana S t a t e Prison guard but was t e r - minated a f t e r s i x months. H i s employment with the Butte police force i n 1971 was terminated before h i s probationary ( s i x month) period expired. Verrall then went t o the s t a t e of Washington and there worked f o r the King County highway p a t r o l a s a p r i v a t e security guard, but l e f t a f t e r only one week. In 1973 he was a police o f f i c e r f o r Boulder, Montana, but l e f t a f t e r only four months employment, during which he was o f f i c i a l l y charged with assault while on duty. Verrall then d r i f t e d back and f o r t h from Montana t o the s t a t e of Washington, not having any steady job and drawing periodic welfare assistance f o r himself and family. erra all's interest i n being a deputy sheriff for Silver B o w County dates back t o 1969 when he asked the then sheriff for a job a s a deputy but was refused. In 1974, when a new sheriff was elected, but before he took office, Verrall approached him and told him that he would buy drugs for him. A t the time of the incidents involved i n t h i s case, Verrall had f i l e d an application t o be a deputy sheriff for Silver B o w County, and although he had not been o f f i c i a l l y hired, he was working as a drug purchaser for the sheriff ' s of fice. O n January 26, 1975, Verrall called Grenfell and asked him for marijuana. Grenfell t e s t i f i e d he suggested beer instead, but Verrall said he was "uptight" and needed marijuana. Grenfell went t o a local tavern and inquired about two men he had worked with and knew t o be involved with drugs. After learning they lived i n a t r a i l e r court i n the "Country Club area", he obtained some hashish and gave it t o Verrall. Verrall l a t e r delivered the hashish t o the sheriff. This transaction comprised count one of the Information, on which Grenfell was acquitted. O n January 27, 1975, Verrall called Grenfell's home many times. Grenfell a t f i r s t told h i s wife t o t e l l Verrall he was not a t home. Later, Grenfell returned the c a l l . Verrall told him the hashish gdve him a good night's sleep and he had a friend who wanted some LSD. C-renfell said he did not know where t o get LSD, but he would talk t o the men who gave him the hashish. H e obtained $20 from Verrall and bought $10 worth of L S D from h i s suppliers. Grenfell gave the L S D and the $10 change ,.,tot. Verrall. Verrall delivered the L S D t o the sheriff. These events were the basis for count two of the Information, on which Grenfell was acquitted. O n January 28, 1975, Verrall drove t o Grenfell's home and asked Grenfell t o work on h i s automobile. A t that time a "partner- ship" was discussed whereby they would purchase a large quantity of L S D t o s e l l to Verrall's friend a t a p r o f i t t o finance a t r i p t o Utah to obtain work. (Verrall promised Grenfell he could get him a job i n Utah with a mining company and had even helped him f i l l out the application forms). Grenfell then went t o h i s suppliers i n the t r a i l e r home t o ask the price of L S D i f bought i n bulk. H e obtained some hashish and amphetamines which he l a t e r gave t o Verrall. The "big buy1' was s e t for January 29, 1975. These events comprised count three of the Information, on which Grenfell was acquitted. After Verrall l e f t , Grenfell returned t o the suppliers and obtained a small amount oflhashish for h i s own use. The ultimate objective of the s h e r i f f ' s office was t o catch the suppliers to Grenfell, although t h i s was never accomplished, due t o a failure of the sheriff's office t o follow Grenfell t o the t r a i l e r home where the suppliers lived. O n the morning of January 29, 1975, Grenfell, knowing t h i s was the day of the "big buy", was nervous and reluctant t o go through with the purchase. H e t r i e d t o smoke the hashish he had purchased the night before, but it hurt h i s throat. Verrall t r i e d t o calm him down during a telephone conversation by assuring Grenfell everything would be a l l right and t e l l i n g him they needed the money for the t r i p to Utah. Verrall arrived a t Grenfell's home that afternoon with $900. The b i l l s had been photocopied and the s e r i a l numbers recorded by the sheriff's office. Grenfell's home was under surveillance. Verrall gave Grenfell $475 of the $900. Grenfell l e f t and made a purchase of 320 L S D p i l l s . (The s h e r i f f ' s office failed i n i t s assignment t o follow Grenfell and catch h i s suppliers). When Grenfell returned to his home he gave the LSD p i l l s and $43 i n change t o Verrall. They s p l i t the r e s t of the $900 equally. A s Verrall l e f t with the p i l l s , he signaled the s h e r i f f ' s deputies who quickly arrested Grenfell. This f i n a l transaction, a transfer of the p i l l s from Grenfell t o Verrall, comprised count four of the Information. Grenfell was convicted on t h i s count. H e appeals. Montana's entrapment statute, section 94-3-111, R.C.M. 1947, provides : "A person is not guilty of an offense i f h i s conduct is incited o r induced by a public servant, or h i s agent for the purpose of obtaining evidence for the prosecution of such person. However, t h i s section is inapplicable i f a public servant or h i s agent, merely affords t o such person the opportunity o r f a c i l i t y for committing an offense i n furtherance of criminal purpose which such person has originated." This statute is consonant with e a r l i e r decisions of t h i s Court which set forth the following elements of entrapment: (1) Criminal intent or design originating i n the mind of the police officer o r informer; (2) absence of criminal intent o r design originating i n the mind of the accused; and (3) luring or inducing the accused into committing a crime he had no intention of committing. State ex rel. Hamlin, Jr. v. District Court, 163 Mont. 16, 515 P.2d 74; State v. Karathanos, 158 Mont. 461, 493 P.2d 326. The record shows Grenfell was not predisposed t o commit t h i s offense. There was no evidence that prior t o January 26, 1975, Grenfell had ever used o r sold drugs. Grenfell's close friendship with Verrall spanned approximately s i x months, yet Verrall t e s t i f i e d t h a t Grenfell never offered t o s e l l him drugs. The one time Grenfell admitted trying t o smoke hashish he said he q u i t because it hurt h i s throat. This i s not l i k e S t a t e v. Harney, 160 Mont. 55, 499 P.2d 802, where the drug informer made only a casual o f f e r t o buy drugs from the defendant. Here, the e n t i r e scheme originated i n erra all's mind. His telephone c a l l t o Grenfell on January 26, 1975, was the beginning of four consecutive days of p e r s i s t e n t e f f o r t s t o involve Grenfell i n drugs, solely f o r t h e purpose of gathering evidence against him. Whenever Grenfell showed reluc- tance, Verrall coaxed him with visions of V e r r a l l ' s personal need and Grenfell's need t o have money t o t r a v e l t o Utah t o find a job. Had it not been f o r Verrall' s creative a c t i v i t i e s , t h i s offense would never have been committed. The conviction i s reversed and ordered dismissed. Chief J u s t i c e \