State v. Redlich , 322 Mont. 476 ( 2004 )

No. 03-391
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
2004 MT 235STATE OF MONTANA,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
BRYAN JAMES REDLICH,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Fifth Judicial District,
In and for the County of Beaverhead, Cause No. DC 2002-2905,
The Honorable Loren Tucker, Judge presiding.
COUNSEL OF RECORD:
For Appellant:
Wendy Holton, Attorney at Law, Helena, Montana
For Respondent:
Hon. Mike McGrath, Attorney General; Jim Wheelis,
Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana
W. G. Gilbert, III, City Attorney, Dillon, Montana
Submitted on Briefs: December 11, 2003
Decided: August 31, 2004
Filed:
__________________________________________
Clerk
Justice Jim Regnier delivered the Opinion of the Court.
¶1 Bryan James Redlich (Redlich) appeals from an order of the Fifth Judicial District
Court, Beaverhead County, entered on March 28, 2003, denying his motion to suppress
evidence obtained after a warrantless search of a home he occupied as a party guest. We
affirm.
¶2 The issue on appeal is whether the District Court erred in denying Redlich’s motion
to suppress.
BACKGROUND, STANDARD OF REVIEW AND DISCUSSION
¶3 Redlich’s appeal stems from the same facts as State v. Smith, 2004 MT 234, 322
Mont. 466, ___ P.3d ___. We need not recite the facts and standard of review here; instead
we refer the reader to our opinion in Smith. The only relevant difference is that upon
entering the apartment, the officers found Redlich in a bedroom rather than in the bathroom,
where they found Smith. Redlich was charged with Unlawful Transactions with Children
and Underage Possession of Alcohol. Like Smith, Redlich filed a motion to suppress
evidence obtained during the warrantless search of the apartment. Redlich appeals the denial
of said motion.
¶4 Based on the same rationale as we set forth in ¶¶ 8-11 of Smith, we affirm the District
Court. The District Court did not err by denying Redlich’s motion to suppress. Redlich did
not have a reasonable expectation of privacy from the police in the common areas of the
apartment, and thus did not having standing to challenge the search.
¶5 Affirmed.
2
/S/ JIM REGNIER
We Concur:
/S/ KARLA M. GRAY
/S/ PATRICIA O. COTTER
/S/ JOHN WARNER
/S/ W. WILLIAM LEAPHART
/S/ JAMES C. NELSON
/S/ JIM RICE
3