STATE v STENSON

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 13871 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE O M N A A F F OTN 1977 STATE O MONTAIJA, F P l a i n t i f f and A p p e l l a n t , -VS- ALLISON K. STENSON, D e f e n d a n t and Respondent. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e Ninth J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , H o n o r a b l e R. D. M c P h i l l i p s , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . C o u n s e l o f Record: For Appellant: 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 J o h n P. Moore, County A t t o r n e y , Cut Bank, Montana L a r r y E p s t e i n , Deputy County A t t o r n e y , a r g u e d , C u t Bank, Montana F o r Respondent: Werner and N e l s o n , Cut Bank, Mdntana James C. Nelson a r g u e d , C u t Bank, Montana F o r Amicus C u r i a e : Barney Reagan, Cut Bank, Montana P h i l i p E. Roy, Browning, lYbntana Submitted: Decided: Filed: 1 6 I@ December 8 , 1977 FEB 1 6 1978 Hon. P e t e r G. Meloy, D i s t r i c t Judge, s i t t i n g f o r M r . J u s t i c e Frank I. Haswell, d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court: Defendant, a non-Indian, was charged i n t h e D i s t r i c t Court, G l a c i e r County, with c r i m i n a l possession of dangerous drugs. The s t a t e appeals from t h e D i s t r i c t Court's o r d e r suppressing evidence s e i z e d on t h e Blackfeet Indian Reservation by Blackfeet T r i b a l p o l i c e a c t i n g under a u t h o r i t y of a search warrant issued by t h e Blackfeet T r i b a l Court. The Blackfeet T r i b e and Barney Reagan f i l e d b r i e f s a s amicus c u r i a e . O December 2, 1976, C l i f f o r d 0. Edwards, t h e Blackfeet n T r i b a l i n v e s t i g a t o r , a p p l i e d t o t h e Blackfeet T r i b a l Court f o r a search warrant t o search Room 205 of t h e War Bonnet Lodge i n Browning, Montana, located within t h e e x t e r i o r boundaries of t h e Blackfeet Indian Reservation. Edwards applied f o r t h e warrant pursuant t o Chapter 6 of t h e Blackfeet T r i b a l Law and Order Code. From h i s own i n v e s t i g a t i o n and from information supplied by i n formants, Edwards believed t h a t a "convicted u s e r of n a r c o t i c s " was s e l l i n g drugs from Room 205. Edwards l a t e r t e s t i f i e d a t t h e suppression hearing t h a t t h e "convicted user" he r e f e r r e d t o i n h i s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a search warrant was Gale James Lapeyre, an e n r o l l e d member of t h e Blackfeet Tribe. Room 205 was r e g i s t e r e d i n t h e name of M r . M Disposal Service, a corporation. Upon receiving Edwards' a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a search warrant and taking unrecorded testimony i n i t s support, Lenore S a l o i s , Chief Judge of t h e Blackfeet T r i b a l Court, issued a search warrant. When Edwards and o t h e r t r i b a l o f f i c e r s searched t h e motel room, they found and c o n f i s c a k d dangerous drugs c o n s i s t i n g of marijuana and LSD, and c e r t a i n drug paraphernalia. They then a r r e s t e d t h e two persons occupying t h e room, Lapeyre and A l l i s o n K. Stenson, defendant i n t h i s a c t i o n . The t r i b a l a u t h o r i t i e s turned Lapeyre over t o t h e f e d e r a l a u t h o r i t i e s f o r prosecution and turned Stenson over t o t h e s t a t e a u t h o r i t i e s f o r prosecution. On appeal we a r e asked t o decide t h e s e i s s u e s : 1. Whether t h e v a l i d i t y o f a search warrant, and a f f i d a v i t i n i t s support, issued by t h e Blackfeet T r i b a l Court should be determined by Montana law o r Blackfeet T r i b a l law, where t h e search i s of a motel room l o c a t e d within t h e e x t e r i o r boundaries of t h e Reservation, where t h e search r e s u l t s i n t h e a r r e s t of a non-Indian occupant of t h e motel room, and where t h e evidence obtained pursuant t o t h e search warrant i s turned over t o s t a t e law enforcement a u t h o r i t i e s f o r use i n a s t a t e prosecution of t h e non- Indian? 2. Whether t h e search warrant and a f f i d a v i t were d e f e c t i v e under t h e a p p l i c a b l e law? The s t a t e contends t h e v a l i d i t ; of t h e search warrant and a f f i d a v i t must be governed by Blackfeet T r i b a l law. It argues t h a t because t h e Congress of t h e United S t a t e s has granted I n d i a n t r i b e s t h e power t o adopt a t r i b a l c o n s t i t u t i o n and by-laws pursuant t o which t h e Blackfeet Tribe e s t a b l i s h e d a T r i b a l Court and a T r i b a l Law and Order Code, t h e Blackfeet Tribe i s t h e "only proper a u t h o r i t y vested with j u r i s d i c t i o n t o i s s u e a Warrant f o r a Search such a s was conducted here." I n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e t h e s t a t e argues t h i s Court should analogize t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n t o t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p e s t a b l i s h e d between f e d e r a l and s t a t e governments where evidence obtained pursuant t o a s t a t e issued search warrant i s admissible i n a f e d e r a l prosecution i f by f e d e r a l standards t h e r e has n o t been an unreasonable search and s e i z u r e . The amicus Blackfeet T r i b e contends t h a t under e i t h e r conf l i c t of laws o r comity d o c t r i n e s , Blackfeet T r i b a l law i s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e law by which t o judge t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e search warrant and a f f i d a v i t . I n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e , t h e Tribe argues t h a t Blackfeet T r i b a l law i s e n t i t l e d t o f u l l f a i t h and c r e d i t under t h e f u l l f a i t h and c r e d i t c l a u s e of t h e United S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n . The o t h e r amicus contends: ( l ) \ t h a t t h e r e a r e n o t s u f f i c i e n t f a c t s shown t o determine whether, under t h e Blackfeet T r i b a l C o n s t i t u t i o n and Law and Order Code, t h e Blackfeet T r i b a l Court had j u r i s d i c t i o n t o i s s u e t h e search warrant; and ( 2 ) t h a t i n determining whether probable cause e x i s t e d t o i s s u e t h e search warrant, t h i s Court need n o t decide which law, Montana o r Blackfeet, a p p l i e s because t h e s t a t u t e s involved a r e "exactly t h e same ." Defendant argues t h a t Montana s t a t u t e s and t h e i r case law i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a r e t h e a p p l i c a b l e law and t h a t a non-Indian by going onto t h e r e s e r v a t i o n does not waive t h e p r o t e c t i o n afforded him by t h e Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n and Criminal Procedure Code. During o r a l argument, both t h e s t a t e and defendant agreed t h a t under any law--federal, s t a t e o r t r i b a l - - t h e search warrant and a f f i d a v i t were d e f e c t i v e and t h e evidence must be suppressed. Given t h e p a r t i e s ' agreement t h a t i n any event t h e evidence must be suppressed, w hold i t i s e e f o r t h i s Court t o de- c i d e t h e o t h e r questions t Hon. Peter G. Frank I. Haswell. We Concur:

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.