Open-fields doctrine: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 17:45, 4 October 2019

Revision as of 02:54, 5 October 2019

Line 205:

===''State v. Bullock''===

Contemporaneously with ''Johnson'', another case involving the open-fields doctrine began working its way through Montana's state courts. Unlike its state and federal predecessors, it involved [[Poaching|illegally taken game]] rather than marijuana cultivation.<ref name="State v. Bullock">{{cite court|litigants=State v. Bullock|volumevol=301901|reporter=[[Pacific Reporter|P.2d]]|opinion=61|court=[[Montana Supreme Court|Mont.]]|date=1995|url=https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2059160847971143084|accessdate=September 21, 2019}}</ref>

In October 1991, Chuck Wing, a [[Boulder, Montana]], man saw a six- or seven-point bull [[elk]] on a hill as he was returning from work. He knew that these elk could only be taken by hunters with special permits in that area. As he was watching he saw two men shoot the elk and put it in their truck, which he knew belonged to a man named Eddie Peterson, without [[Field dressing (hunting)|field dressing]] it. Wing reported it to [[Jefferson County, Montana|Jefferson County]] Sheriff Tom Dawson, which in turn passed the information to the [[Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks|state Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks]] (MFWP).<ref name="Bullock 64">''Bullock'' at 64</ref>