OR: Vehicle didn’t have to be seen moving before stop for automobile exception to apply (state constitution)

Defendant’s car didn’t have to be seen moving at the time of the stop for the automobile exception to apply. State v. Von Flue, 287 Ore. App. 798, 2017 Ore. App. LEXIS 1088 (Sept. 20, 2017)* (state constitution):

Furthermore, as in Andersen and Meharry, the fact that the vehicle was not moving and defendant was standing beside it by the time the officer stopped her does not render the automobile exception inapplicable here. As in those cases, under the circumstances presented, the trial court reasonably could have found that defendant stopped her car to complete a drug transaction before resuming her trip. Defendant’s act of stopping to talk with Morton while standing immediately beside her car is like the circumstances in Andersen and Meharry. Indeed, as the court emphasized in Andersen, in Meharry, the defendant had stepped away from her vehicle and into a convenience store and the vehicle was, nonetheless, mobile for purposes of the automobile exception. Andersen, 361 Ore. at 198; Meharry, 342 Ore. at 180-81. In this case, defendant remained beside her vehicle while the officer approached. Under the circumstances, and in contrast to the circumstances in Kock and Kurokawa-Lasciak, when the officer stopped defendant, the vehicle was mobile for purposes of the automobile exception.

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, State constitution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.