Montana § 46-4-409 Exceptions To Custodial Recording Requirements

Montana Statutes

§ 46-4-409 — Exceptions To Custodial Recording Requirements

Montana § 46-4-409

Title 46CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

Ch. 4INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES

Part 4Custodial Interrogations -- Recording

This text of Montana § 46-4-409 (Exceptions To Custodial Recording Requirements) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mont. Code Ann. § 46-4-409 (2026).

Text

46-4-409 . Exceptions to custodial recording requirements. A judge shall admit statements or evidence of statements that do not conform to 46-4-408 if, at hearing, the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence that:

(1)the statements have been made voluntarily and are reliable; or

(2)one or more of the following circumstances existed at the time of the custodial interrogation:

(a)the questions put forth by law enforcement personnel and the person's responsive statements were part of the routine processing or booking of the person;

(b)before or during a custodial interrogation, the person unambiguously declared that the person would respond to the law enforcement officer's questions only if the person's statements were not electronically recorded;

(c)the failure to electronically

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

46-4-409 . Exceptions to custodial recording requirements. A judge shall admit statements or evidence of statements that do not conform to 46-4-408 if, at hearing, the state proves by a preponderance of the evidence that:
(1) the statements have been made voluntarily and are reliable; or
(2) one or more of the following circumstances existed at the time of the custodial interrogation:
(a) the questions put forth by law enforcement personnel and the person's responsive statements were part of the routine processing or booking of the person;
(b) before or during a custodial interrogation, the person unambiguously declared that the person would respond to the law enforcement officer's questions only if the person's statements were not electronically recorded;
(c) the failure to electronically record an interrogation in its entirety was the result of unforeseeable equipment failure and obtaining replacement equipment was not practicable;
(d) exigent circumstances prevented the making of an electronic recording of the custodial interrogation;
(e) the person's statements were surreptitiously recorded by or under the direction of law enforcement personnel;
(f) the person's statement was made during a custodial interrogation that was conducted in another state by peace officers of that state in compliance with the laws of that state; or
(g) the person's statement was made spontaneously and not in response to a question.