State v. Beltran-Solas

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
  • Date Filed: 04-20-2016
  • Case #: A154540
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Lagesen, J. for the Court; Duncan, P.J.; & Flynn, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

An accused criminal defendant, after being appointed legal counsel under Article 1, Section 11 of the Oregon Constitution, cannot be interrogated about the crime charged without the counsel’s representation.

Defendant appealed a trial court judgment convicting him of being a felon in possession of a firearm and endangering the welfare of a minor. Defendant had previously retained an attorney for a menacing charge when officers executed a search warrant for his home. When the officers found a handgun in Defendant’s bedroom, they asked Defendant about the previous menacing incident and if there were other weapons in his home. Defendant said there were two rifles in the attic, which the officers subsequently found. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence of the firearms found in the attic, arguing that the officers had violated Article I, Section 11 of the Oregon Constitution by questioning Defendant about the prior menacing incident, even though Defendant had an attorney for the menacing charge. The trial court denied the motion. The Court held that the officer’s questioning violated Defendant’s rights under the Oregon Constitution because the questioning related to the menacing charge, for which Defendant already had an attorney and the right for that attorney to be present during questioning. Reversed and remanded.

Advanced Search