OR: Opening folded paper in wallet during inventory was excessive because it didn’t indicate contents

Defendant was arrested for a probation violation, and an inventory of his wallet included opening a folded piece of paper. Opening it was unreasonable because nothing suggested there was contraband inside [but there was]. State v. Garcia-Cruz, 287 Ore. App. 516, 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 1025 (Aug. 30, 2017).

Defendant mentions that a police dog was present at the scene, but it was not a drug dog, and it did no sniff like in Jardines. This was a matter of consent, and the dog had nothing to do with the consent being granted. United States v. Kendricks, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142938 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 5, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.