OR: Here, “the ‘Private Drive’ and ‘No Trespassing’ signs did not objectively manifest an intention to prohibit public access”

“Thus, when viewed together, the ‘Private Drive’ and ‘No Trespassing’ signs did not objectively manifest an intention to prohibit public access to Lowe Road, particularly in the absence of other barriers to entry, such as fences, gates, or signs clearly articulating an intention to exclude even casual visitors. … Accordingly, regardless of whether the officers saw the posted signs, those signs were inadequate to convey that all casual visitors were prohibited. Thus, sufficient evidence supported the trial court’s conclusion that, by driving to and approaching defendant’s residence, the officers did not conduct a ‘search’ within the meaning of Article I, section 9.” State v. Wilson, 285 Ore. App. 296, 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 558 (May 3, 2017).