State v. Jensen

PJo. 84-538 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE O F M N A A OTN 1985 STATE O MONTANA, F P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t , -vs- DELBERT JEPJSEN , D e f e n d a n t and Respondent. APPEAL FROM: D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e Twelfth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , I n and f o r t h e County o f H i l l , The H o n o r a b l e Chan E t t i e n , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . COUPSSEL O RECORD: F For A p p e l l a n t : Hon. Mike G r e e l y , A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , H e l e n a , Montana James S c h e i e r a r g u e d , A s s t . A t t y . G e n e r a l , Helena Ronald W. S m i t h , County A t t o r n e y , Havre, Montana Edward C o r r i g a n , Deputy County A t t o r n e y , Havre F o r Respondent : Law O f f i c e s o f F r a n k Altman; Ivan E v i l s i z e r argued, Havre, Montana - Submitted: May 231 1985 Decided: August 5 , 1985 Filed: AUG 6 -- 1985 Clerk Mr. J u s t i c e F r e d J. Weber d e l i v e r e d t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t . The State appeals from a pre-trial order suppressing e v i d e n c e s e i z e d i n a s e a r c h o f D e l b e r t J e n s e n ' s home by law enforcement o f f i c e r s with a search warrant. The D i s t r i c t Court determined that the Justice of t h e Peace issued the warrant without probable cause. We find t h a t the application contained s u f f i c i e n t probable cause t o support t h e issuance of t h e search warrant. W e reverse the order of t h e D i s t r i c t Court. The i s s u e s on a p p e a l a r e : 1. Was t h e search warrant based upon p r o b a b l e cause? 2. If not, should the illegally seized evidence be admissible under the "good faith exception1' to the exclusionary rule? On April 24, 1984, Hill County Deputy Sheriff Mark Stolen applied t o J u s t i c e of t h e P e a c e Edward G. Vesecka, Jr., for a search warrant f o r a t r a i l e r a t 936 2nd Street North, Havre , Montana. Deputy S t o l e n ' s a f f i d a v i t i n s u p p o r t of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n s e t f o r t h t h e following: "On A p r i l 1 7 , 1984, Dorothy C o c h r a n , o f 2865 7 t h S t r e e t E a s t , H a v r e , Montana, r e p o r t e d t o t h e H i l l County S h e r i f f ' s Department t h e t h e f t o f a y e l l o w , McCullough c h a i n saw, a W i n c h e s t e r 30-30 c a l i b e r l e v e r a c t i o n r i f l e , a M a r l i n 30-30 c a l i b e r l e v e r a c t i o n r i f l e , a H & R 10 gauge s i n g l e s h o t s h o t g u n and t a n c a n v a s b a g , and a M a r l i n .22 c a l i b e r r i f l e . "On A p r i l 1 8 , 1 9 8 4 , a n i n d i v i d u a l v o l u n t e e r e d t o Ms. Cochran t h a t h e had been i n v o l v e d i n t h e t h e f t o f h e r g u n s and p r o p e r t y . H e a l s o informed h e r t h a t some o f t h e i t e m s had b e e n pawned, w h i l e h e r g u n s had b e e n t r a d e d f o r d r u g s . Subsequently, M s . Cochran d i s c o v e r e d a t t h e R-Mew Pawn Shop, H a v r e , Montana, t h e c h a i n saw s h e had p r e v i o u s l y r e p o r t e d stolen a s w e l l a s other i t e m s of personal property. "On A p r i l 20, 1984, M s . C o c h r a n l s i n f o r m e r r e t u r n e d t o h e r o n e o f t h e r i f l e s h e had s t o l e n and ex- changed f o r d r u g s . H e a l s o t o l d h e r t h e exchange had t a k e n p l a c e a t a w h i t e t r a i l e r , 936 2nd S t r e e t N o r t h , Havre, Montana. A t that location, Ms. Cochran c o n f r o n t e d a n i n d i v i d u a l named Ben and was g i v e n h e r s t o l e n 30-30 W i n c h e s t e r r i f l e . Ms. C o c h r a n ' s . 2 2 c a l i b e r r i f l e and M e r l i n [ s i c ] 30-30 c a l i b e r r i f l e h a v e n o t y e t been r e c o v e r e d . "Ms. Cochran a l s o l e a r n e d from h e r i n f o r m a n t t h a t h e r s h o t g u n had b e e n t r a d e d f o r $40.00 w o r t h o f Columbian m a r i j u a n a . Ms. Cochran h a s a l s o b e e n t o l d by a n i n d i v i d u a l named Sonny, who s t a y s w i t h V i r g i n i a B e r n a r d i , t h a t he had t r a d e d a t t h e t r a i l - e r a t 936 2nd S t r e e t N o r t h , Havre, Montana, a 30-30 r i f l e f o r $105.00 w o r t h o f m a r i j u a n a . "On A p r i l 1 0 , 1 9 8 4 , Ron C r o c k e r , 926 2nd S t r e e t N o r t h , H a v r e , Montana, complained t o t h e H i l l County Sheriff 's Department that he believed Delbert Jensen, Ben M o r r i s , and Penny Genger, r e s i d e n t s o f a t r a i l e r on 2nd S t r e e t N o r t h , H a v r e , Montana, e a s t o f h i s home, w e r e s e l l i n g d r u g s . In t h e l a s t week o f March, 1984, M r . C r o c k e r had w i t n e s s e d a n exchange a t t h a t l o c a t i o n o f money and what h e b e l i e v e d t o b e m a r i j u a n a . M r . Crocker a l s o h e a r d , on a n o t h e r o c c a s i o n , o n e 1 3 o r 1 4 y e a r o l d boy s a y t o a n o t h e r who had gone t o D e l b e r t J e n s e n ' s t r a i l e r , ' d i d you g e t t h e s t u f f ? ' M r . Crocker a l s o complained t h a t a - l a r g e amount o f t r a f f i c had been s t o p p i n g , on a d a i l y b a s i s , a t D e l b e r t J e n s e n ' s t r a i l e r ; t h a t a v e h i c l e ' s m o t o r o f t e n would b e l e f t r u n n i n g w h i l e a n o c c u p a n t went i n t o t h e t r a i l e r f o r a s h o r t t i m e and t h e n l e f t . "On A p r i l 21, 1984, a c o n c e r n e d c i t i z e n a l s o com- p l a i n e d a b o u t h e a v y t r a f f i c on 2nd S t r e e t N o r t h , Havre, Montana; t h a t h e r c a t had a l m o s t b e e n h i t by a c a r d r i v e n by an i n d i v i d u a l d e s c r i b e d t o h e r by neighborhood k i d s a s a 'dope d e a l e r . ' Neighborhood k i d s a l s o t o l d h e r t h i s 'dope d e a l e r ' bought h i s d r u g s from p e o p l e on 2nd S t r e e t N o r t h . " I , Mark S t o l e n , have been a law e n f o r c e m e n t o f f i - cer f o r 12 y e a r s . I t h a s been my e x p e r i e n c e t h a t t h e e v e n t s and u n u s u a l t r a f f i c d e s c r i b e d by Ron C r o c k e r and ' c o n c e r n e d c i t i z e n s ' a r e i n d i c a t i v e o f t r a n s a c t i o n s i n dangerous drugs. I h a v e known M s . Cochran f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s and b e l i e v e h e r s t a t e - m e n t s a r e t r u s t w o r t h y and v a l u a b l e . It has a l s o been my e x p e r i e n c e t h a t s t a t e m e n t s o f c o n c e r n e d c i t i z e n s , p e r s o n a l l y u n i n v o l v e d , a r e r e l i a b l e and important leads t o follow." Based upon Deputy S t o l e n ' s a p p l i c a t i o n and s u p p o r t i n g a f f i d a - vit, the Justice of t h e Peace i s s u e d a search warrant f o r defendant's trailer. No o t h e r sworn t e s t i m o n y o r e v i d e n c e was p r e s e n t e d t o t h e J u s t i c e o f t h e P e a c e p r i o r t o i s s u a n c e of t h e warrant. On A p r i l 27, 1984, H i l l County Deputy S h e r i f f s , Havre C i t y P o l i c e and o f f i c i a l s from t h e S t a t e Department o f F i s h , Wildlife and Parks searched defendant's residence. They s e i z e d more t h a n 60 grams o f m a r i j u a n a , drug paraphernalia, cocaine and a rifle. Defendant Jensen was arrested and charged w i t h t h e f t , criminal s a l e o f dangerous drugs (mari- juana), c r i m i n a l possession o f dangerous drugs (marijuana), criminal possession of paraphernalia, and criminal possession of dangerous drugs (cocaine). He pled not guilty to each count. Defense counsel filed a motion to suppress all of the evidence seized during the search based upon lack of suffi- cient facts in the application to show probable cause for issuance of the warrant. Following a hearing on the motion and relying solely on the information contained within the four corners of the application, the District Court found a lack of probable cause and granted defendant's motion. The State appeals. To determine whether there was probable cause to issue the search warrant, we must look only at the information contained in the four corners of the application. State v. Isom (1982), 196 Mont. 330, 641 P.2d 417. The test for determining whether an informant's tip establishes probable cause for issuance of a search warrant is the "totality of the circumstances" test set forth in Illinois v. Gates (1983), 462 U.S. 213, 238-39: "[Wle conclude that it is wiser to abandon the 'two-pronged test' established by our decisions in ~ ~ u i l a r Spinelli. In its place we reaffirm the and totality-of-the-circumstances analysis that tradi- tionally has informed probable-cause determina- tions. The task of the issuing magistrate is simply to make a practical, common-sense decision whether, given all the circumstances set forth in the affidavit before him, including the 'veracity' and 'basis of knowledge' of persons supplying hearsay information, there is a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime will be found in a particular place. And the duty of a reviewing court is simply to ensure that the magis- trate had a 'substantial basis for ... conclud [ing]' that probable cause existed. " (cita- tions omitted) This "totality-of-the-circumstances" analysis was adopted in Montana in 1983. State v. Kelly (Mont. 1983), 668 P.2d 1032, The issuing magistrate must only determine that there is a probability, not a prima facie showing of criminal activi- ty. State v. O'Neill (Mont. 1984), 679 P.2d 760, 764, 41 St.Rep. 420, 423. The d u t y o f a r e v i e w i n g c o u r t i s s i m p l y t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e m a g i s t r a t e had a s u b s t a n t i a l b a s i s f o r con- cluding t h a t probable cause t o i s s u e a search warrant e x i s t - ed. S t a t e v. Erler (Mont. 1 9 8 3 ) , 672 P.2d 624, 627, 40 St.Rep. 1915, 1918. We find that the information contained in Deputy S t o l e n ' s a f f i d a v i t provides a s u b s t a n t i a 1 b a s i s f o r conclud- ing that there was probable cause to issue the search warrant. The a f f i d a v i t d e s c r i b e d t h e p l a c e where s t o l e n p r o p e r t y had b e e n exchanged f o r d r u g s and t h e k i n d o f d r u g s i n v o l v e d i n t h e exchange. The a f f i d a v i t f u r t h e r s t a t e s t h a t : "At t h a t location, Ms. Cochran c o n f r o n t e d a n i n d i v i d u a l named Ben and was g i v e n h e r s t o l e n 30-30 Winchester r i f l e . " Retrieval of t h e s t o l e n r i f l e by t h e c i t i z e n - i n f o r m a n t i s s t r o n g corrobo- ration of her reliability. Ms. Cochran' s r e l i a b i l i t y is f u r t h e r b u t t r e s s e d by Deputy S t o l e n ' s s t a t e m e n t t h a t h e had known h e r "for s e v e r a l y e a r s and b e l i e v e [ d l h e r s t a t e m e n t s a r e t r u s t w o r t h y and v a l u a b l e . " The a f f i d a v i t f u r t h e r d e s c r i b e s i n f o r m a t i o n g i v e n by two other citizen-informants who complained t h a t r e s i d e n t s o f t h e t r a i l e r w e r e s e l l i n g d r u g s and t h a t , a s a r e s u l t , t h e r e was heavy? d a i l y traffic on their street. Informant Crocker complained that h e had w i t n e s s e d a n exchange o f money for what he believed to be marijuana at the trailer and, on another occasion, he had overheard a boy ask a companion r e t u r n i n g from t h e t r a i l e r , "Did you g e t t h e s t u f f ? " This information corroborates M s . Cochran's t i p t h a t s t o l e n prop- e r t y had been exchanged f o r m a r i j u a n a a t t h e t r a i l e r . M. r C r o c k e r a l s o complained about t h e l a r g e amount o f t r a f f i c stopping d a i l y a t t h e t r a i l e r , o f t e n with motors l e f t running. Crocker's information regarding t h e unusually l a r g e amount o f t r a f f i c a t t h e t r a i l e r was c o r r o b o r a t e d by a n o t h e r citizen-informant's complaint that t h e r e was heavy traffic and h e r c a t was a l m o s t h i t by a c a r d r i v e n by a n i n d i v i d u a l whom neighborhood children described as a "dope dealer." Deputy S t o l e n ' s a f f i d a v i t a l s o s t a t e s t h a t h e had been a law e n f o r c e m e n t o f f i c e r f o r t w e l v e y e a r s and t h a t , i n h i s e x p e r i - ence, the events and unusual traffic described by these concerned c i t i z e n s a r e i n d i c a t i v e o f t r a n s a c t i o n s i n danger- ous drugs. In Montana, the citizen-informant is accepted as reliable. Kelly, 668 P.2d a t 1043, 40 St.Rep. at 1411, citing S t a t e v. Leistiko (1978), 176 Mont. 434, 578 P.2d 1161. Crime victim Dorothy Cochran was the primary citizen-informant. Deputy S t o l e n had known h e r f o r s e v e r a l years and believed her to be trustworthy. The other citizen-informants witnessed a c t i v i t i e s t h a t corroborated M s . Cochran's information. Additional hearsay information in the affidavit came from t i p s t e r s who made admissions against their own p e n a l interests. This Court has upheld the issuance of search warrants where an informant has seen or participated in criminal activity or even in some innocent a c t i v i t y that, given all the circumstances, supports the probability of criminal activity. S e e S t a t e v. OfNeill (Mont. 1 9 8 4 ) , 679 P.2d 760, 4 1 St.Rep. 420; S t a t e v. Kelly (Mont. 1 9 8 3 ) , 668 P.2d 1 0 3 2 , 4 0 St.Rep. 1400. R e l i a b l e h e a r s a y i n f o r m a t i o n may be c o n s i d e r e d t o e s t a b l i s h p r o b a b l e c a u s e . Kelly, 668 P.2d a t 1043, 40 St.Rep. a t 1411. R e l i a b i l i t y may b e deduced from corroborative evidence o r surrounding f a c t s t h a t possess an internal coherence that gives weight to the whole and supports the probability t h a t evidence of a c r i m e w i l l be found i n a p a r t i c u l a r p l a c e . Massachusetts v. Upton (1984), U.S. , 104 S.Ct. 2085, 2088. W e f i n d t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n c o n t a i n s an adequate b a s i s f o r c o n c l u d i n g t h e r e was a f a i r p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t e v i d e n c e o f a crime would b e found a t t h e J e n s e n t r a i l e r . W e hold t h a t t h e i s s u a n c e o f t h e s e a r c h w a r r a n t was s u p p o r t e d by p r o b a b l e cause. Having found t h e w a r r a n t t o b e v a l i d , it i s u n n e c e s s a r y t o d i s c u s s t h e s e c o n d i s s u e r a i s e d by t h e S t a t e r e g a r d i n g t h e "good f a i t h e x c e p t i o n " t o t h e e x c l u s i o n a r y r u l e . The o r d e r o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t i s r e v e r s e d , and t h i s c a u s e i s remanded for trial. W e concur: