State v. Cline

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
  • Date Filed: 07-16-2014
  • Case #: A150318
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Egan, J. for the Court; Nakamoto, J.; and Armstrong, P.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

An officer's act of directing a person to alter the person's course of travel or to otherwise direct the person's movements may often constitute a "show of authority" that effectuates a seizure, but that is not a per se rule of Oregon constitutional law; instead, the officer's directive must be examined in the context of the encounter in which it was made.

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for unlawful possession of marijuana. The Defendant challenged the denial of a motion to suppress evidence. He contended that he was unlawfully seized by the time the officer detected the presence of marijuana in his bags and that the evidence acquired as a result of that seizure should have been suppressed. The Defendant argued that he was seized when the officer asked him to stay on the curb. The Court found that this constituted a de minimis request, and that it did not amount to the type of "show of authority" that the Oregon Constitution required before a seizure would be found. The Court concluded that Defendant was not seized prior to the discovery of the marijuana, and therefore the Defendant was not unlawfully seized. Affirmed.

Advanced Search