Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 46-5-401 (2026)

Investigative Stop And Frisk

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 46. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 5. SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Part 4. Stop and Frisk

Investigative Stop And Frisk

46-5-401. Investigative stop and frisk. (1) In order to obtain or verify an account of the person's presence or conduct or to determine whether to arrest the person, a peace officer may stop any person or vehicle that is observed in circumstances that create a particularized suspicion that the person or occupant of the vehicle has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense. If the stop is for a violation under Title 61, unless emergency circumstances exist or the officer has reasonable cause to fear for the officer's own safety or for the public's safety, the officer shall as promptly as possible inform the person of the reason for the stop.

(2) A peace officer who has lawfully stopped a person or vehicle under this section may:

(a) request the person's name and present address and an explanation of the person's actions and, if the person is the driver of a vehicle, demand the person's driver's license and the vehicle's registration and proof of insurance; and

(b) frisk the person and take other reasonably necessary steps for protection if the officer has reasonable cause to suspect that the person is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or another person present. The officer may take possession of any object that is discovered during the course of the frisk if the officer has probable cause to believe that the object is a deadly weapon until the completion of the stop, at which time the officer shall either immediately return the object, if legally possessed, or arrest the person.

(3) A peace officer who has lawfully stopped a person or vehicle under this section may make a reasonable attempt, upon reasonable suspicion and when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. The peace officer shall make a report to a federal immigration agency as defined in 27-16-801 if a person stopped under this section is not lawfully present in the United States.

(4) A peace officer acting under subsection (2) while the peace officer is not in uniform shall inform the person as promptly as possible under the circumstances and in any case before questioning the person that the officer is a peace officer.

History: En. 95-719 by Sec. 4, Ch. 513, L. 1973; amd. Sec. 8, Ch. 184, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 95-719(1) thru (3); amd. Sec. 42, Ch. 800, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 343, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 123, L. 2025.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 196 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: City of Missoula v. Kroschel, 419 P.3d 1208 (Mont. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Missoula v. Kroschel, 419 P.3d 1208 (Mont. 2018). · cites it 28× “the Municipal Court and later moved for suppression of the State's evidence of her age, date of birth, and the fact that she gave false information to police, on the asserted ground that the police unreasonably prolonged the initial investigative stop in violation of the Fourth…”

State v. S. Hoover, 2017 MT 236 (Mont. 2017). · cites it 15× “Section 46-5-401(1), MCA ( 1991 Mont. Laws 3027 ).”

State v. Dawson, 1999 MT 171 (Mont. 1999). · cites it 28× “In order to obtain or verify an account of the person's presence or conduct or to determine whether to arrest the person, a peace officer may stop any person or vehicle that is observed in circumstances that create a particularized suspicion that the person or occupant of the…”

State v. Boyer, 2002 MT 33 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 14× “See Section 46-5-401, MCA. Boyer's reliance on the investigatory stop statute and case law in support of his position is ill founded.”

State v. Broken Rope, 925 P.2d 1157 (Mont. 1996). · cites it 34× “The dispositive issue on appeal is whether the District Court erred in finding that a particularized suspicion existed to justify an investigative stop of Broken Rope under § 46-5-401, MCA. The following facts are undisputed.”

State v. Williamson, 1998 MT 199 (Mont. 1998). · cites it 22× “¶ 10 Before addressing whether the District Court erred in concluding that Weber had probable cause to stop Williamson, we *234 take this opportunity to clarify the difference between the probable cause necessary to effectuate a valid arrest and the particularized suspicion…”

State v. Randy Graham, 2007 MT 358 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 14× “Section 46-5-401, MCA. I submit that, far from needing “far more,” virtually any fact which may have been added to the situation here would have supported, not just particularized suspicion, but probable cause that a sex crime was being committed.”

State v. Olson, 2003 MT 61 (Mont. 2003). · cites it 12× “Section 46-5-401, MCA (1999), addresses investigative stops.”

Kleinsasser v. State, 42 P.3d 801 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 18× “Insofar as is relevant in the present case, the only issue under consideration was whether Officer Leasure "had reasonable grounds to believe" that Kleinsasser "had been driving or was in actual *804 physical control of a vehicle upon ways of this state open to the public while…”

State v. Martinez, 2003 MT 65 (Mont. 2003). · cites it 8× “Section 46-5-401, MCA 723 NJhether particularized suspicion supports an investigative stop is a questiort of fact that is analyzed in the context of the totality of the circumstances.”

State v. Roberts, 1999 MT 59 (Mont. 1999). · cites it 14× “In order to obtain or verify an account of the person's presence or conduct or to determine whether to arrest the person, a peace officer may stop any person or vehicle that is observed in circumstances that create a particularized suspicion that the person or occupant of the…”

Hulse v. State, Dep't of Just., 1998 MT 108 (Mont. 1998). · cites it 7× “iver’s license reinstatement proceeding, a district court is limited to considering whether: (i) a peace officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the person had been driving or was in actual physical control of a vehicle upon ways of this state open to the public while…”

Show all 196 citing cases →

— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-5-401(1) — 89 cases

State v. S. Hoover, 2017 MT 236 (Mont. 2017). “Section 46-5-401(1), MCA ( 1991 Mont. Laws 3027 ).”

State v. Randy Graham, 2007 MT 358 (Mont. 2007). “Section 46-5-401, MCA. I submit that, far from needing “far more,” virtually any fact which may have been added to the situation here would have supported, not just particularized suspicion, but probable cause that a sex crime was being committed.”

Gonzales v. City of Bozeman, 2009 MT 277 (Mont. 2009).

City of Missoula v. Kroschel, 419 P.3d 1208 (Mont. 2018). “the Municipal Court and later moved for suppression of the State's evidence of her age, date of birth, and the fact that she gave false information to police, on the asserted ground that the police unreasonably prolonged the initial investigative stop in violation of the Fourth…”

State v. Thomas, 2008 MT 206 (Mont. 2008).

— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-5-401(2) — 3 cases

State v. Bar-Jonah, 2004 MT 344 (Mont. 2004).

State v. Driscoll, 2013 MT 63 (Mont. 2013).

State v. McKeever, 2015 MT 177 (Mont. 2015).

— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-5-401(2)(a) — 8 cases

State v. J. Carrywater, 2022 MT 131 (Mont. 2022).

State v. M. Zeimer, 2022 MT 96 (Mont. 2022).

State v. Chelsea Strom, 2014 MT 234 (Mont. 2014).

State v. Driscoll, 2013 MT 63 (Mont. 2013).

— Mont. Code Ann. § 46-5-401(2)(b) — 3 cases

State v. M. Zeimer, 2022 MT 96 (Mont. 2022).

State v. Pearson, 2011 MT 55 (Mont. 2011).

State v. Stevens, 434 P.3d 904 (Mont. 2019).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.