![]() In contrast, a scan of the other buildings on the property showed them to be normal in their heat emissions. Hayes determined that the distribution of heat energy was consistent with the presence of grow lamps hanging from the ceiling. ![]() The thermal imager showed that the grow shed was discharging a considerable amount of heat. He conducted the scan from the property of a neighbor, who had given permission for Hayes to be there, at a vantage point of about 25 to 30 feet from the grow shed. Hayes had been certified in the use of the device by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in October 1993. The Application for Search Warrant states that in the early morning hours of June 2, 1994, Stanton Hayes, an agent with the Narcotics Investigation Bureau of the Montana Department of Justice (NIB), used a thermal imager to measure heat emissions from the buildings on the property. The search disclosed that the newly constructed building was being used to grow marijuana. On August 25, 1994, members of the Southwest Montana Drug Task Force searched the buildings on the property pursuant to a search warrant issued by the Fifth Judicial District Court. Shortly after purchasing the property, McIntyre and Jones constructed a 30-by-70-foot building approximately 126 feet from the ranch house. They took numerous steps to insure their privacy including posting the property with "No Trespassing" signs, painting the fence posts orange, maintaining perimeter and interior fences and locking the gates. McIntyre and Jones occupied the ranch house. The property is heavily wooded and completely fenced. In October 1993, McIntyre purchased a ten-acre parcel of property with a ranch house and outbuildings near Waterloo, Montana. Did the District Court err in denying Jones' Motion to Dismiss the criminal proceedings against him on double jeopardy grounds after the State obtained a judgment against him in a civil forfeiture action? Did sufficient probable cause exist to support the issuance of a search warrant for Defendants' premises?Ĥ. Did the election by the State not to make a videotape of the results obtained by the thermal imager constitute destruction of exculpatory evidence?ģ. Was the warrantless use of a thermal imager an unconstitutional search?Ģ. We reverse.ĭefendants raise the following issues on appeal:ġ. The District Court for the Fifth Judicial District, Madison County, denied the motions and Defendants appeal. In addition, Jones moved to dismiss the charges against him on the ground that his Fifth Amendment protection against double jeopardy had been violated. ![]() Thaggard, Special Deputy Madison County Attorney, Virginia City, for Plaintiff and Respondent.ĭefendants James Robert Siegal (Siegal), Doyle Wayne Jones (Jones) and James Jeremiah McIntyre (McIntyre) moved to suppress the fruits of a search on the ground that the warrantless use of a thermal imager violated their constitutional rights. Tweeten, Assistant Attorney General, Helena Loren Tucker, Madison County Attorney, Robert Zenker, Deputy Madison *178 County Attorney, Joseph E. Suenram, Hoffman & Suenram, Dillon, for James Robert Siegal. Kozakiewicz, Dillon, for James Jeremiah McIntyre.Īndrew P. Hritsco, Davis, Warren & Hritsco, Dillon, for Doyle Wayne Jones. James Robert SIEGAL, Doyle Wayne Jones and James Jeremiah McIntyre, Defendants and Appellants. 934 P.2d 176 (1997) STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Respondent, ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |