State v. Bishop

¶1 Matthew Bishop appeals his conviction for unlawful methamphetamine possession. He argues that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress the methamphetamine evidence as fruit of a warrant the trial court issued without support of an oath or affirmation. He also argues that the documents supporting the information were stale. We affirm.

Houghton, J.

FACTS

¶2 On December 15, 2006, Bishop pleaded guilty to third degree theft and the municipal court sentenced him to 10 days on work crew, suspending the remaining 355 days of jail time. The trial court ordered him to report to the…