OR automobile exception requires vehicle must be mobile when first encountered in connection with a crime

To justify the automobile exception in Oregon, the vehicle must be mobile when first encountered in connection with a crime. If parked, a warrant must be sought. State v. Belander, 274 Ore. App. 167, 2015 Ore. App. LEXIS 1175 (September 30, 2015).*

The officer had all the occupants get out of the car during the stop. The smell of marijuana was strongest around defendant’s person, so that was reasonable suspicion that defendant was carrying. Therefore, consent could be sought, and consent isn’t disputed. State v. Vennell, 274 Ore. App. 94, 2015 Ore. App. LEXIS 1176 (September 30, 2015).* [Will this change now that recreational use in Oregon is permitted, or will the “strong” smell still be justification?]

Officers responding to a 3 am bar fight ended up talking with defendant and with him in handcuffs. He turned his body repeatedly as officers tried to pat him down. After three paragraphs of explaining, the court shows why a patdown for officer safety was permitted. State v. Castillo-Lima, 274 Ore. App. 67, 2015 Ore. App. LEXIS 1180 (September 30, 2015)* [This case is a good example of the extremes Oregon courts go through to justify warrant exceptions. Not just one fact and done, but a detailed analysis of consequences of what happened and why it was reasonable.]

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Emergency / exigency, Reasonableness. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.