OR: Lifting jail curtain to see def in jail bathroom was not violation of State Const. or 4A

Partially lifting a curtain in jail to observe defendant in the bathroom was not a violation of his reasonable expectation of privacy under the State Constitution nor the Fourth Amendment. State v. Taplin, 311 Or. App. 542, 2021 Ore. App. LEXIS 665 (May 19, 2021).

It took an hour for defendant to arrive at the ER after his accident. Officers considered him a flight risk, and there was no downtime found where the officers could have applied for a search warrant for his BAC. “That evidence adequately supports the trial court’s findings, as set out in its letter opinion, about the need for prompt blood draws and the additional delay that would have been caused if Hargis had applied for and obtained a search warrant before the draws occurred. Under Perryman and Mitchell, those circumstances created an exigency of sufficient magnitude to justify the warrantless blood draws under the Fourth Amendment.” State v. Stephens, 311 Or. App. 588, 2021 Ore. App. LEXIS 659 (May 19, 2021).

A search of a CHP’s private cell phone for law enforcement work product was on the broad waiver plaintiff signed. Quon’s language isn’t limited to work phones only. Therefore, the CHP officers have qualified immunity. Larios v. Lunardi, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 14911 (9th Cir. May 19, 2021).

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Prison and jail searches, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.