OR: Past drug use isn’t reasonable suspicion now

The officer here based his claim of reasonable suspicion to continue the detention on defendant’s past drug conviction. That alone is not reasonable suspicion. Even new syringes in the door pocket didn’t add to it. State v. Oller, 277 Ore. App. 529, 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 413 (April 13, 2016).

Information from a CI led to surveillance of defendant. “[T]he detention was based on a series of events that, considered in combination, an officer with training and experience regarding drug transactions could identify as distinctively associated with criminal activity: the quick meet-up of two people in a parking lot, their brief examination of something that one of them pulled from his clothing, their subsequent ‘smoking something,’ and their quick departure. The trial court did not err when it concluded that the stop was justified by reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and, therefore, denied defendant’s motion to suppress.” State v. Walker, 277 Ore. App. 397, 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 431 (April 13, 2016).*

This entry was posted in Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.