Court Opinion

ID: 9509291
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 21:44:59.318931+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:07:47.428749
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE HUNT
dissenting.
I dissent. I agree with defendant’s argument that the evidence should have been suppressed because it was obtained by a ruse. As the majority points out, the deputy, by a pretense of needing help, which was given to him by defendant, determined after being in the house and outside of the house, that marijuana was being grown on the premises. The search warrant was not issued until after the deputy and two detectives returned to Bozeman and prepared the paperwork to obtain a search warrant. The majority skips over the episode and hangs their ruling on the fact that there was enough evidence for the warrant anyway. This is a tainted search that took advantage of a willingness to help a stranded motorist which supplied the information for law enforcement officials to obtain a warrant.
I would grant the motion to suppress the evidence.