State v. Carson

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
  • Date Filed: 09-07-2017
  • Case #: A157936
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Armstrong, P.J. for the Court; Egan, J.; & Shorr, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

A driver impedes traffic under ORS 811.130 if a by a preponderance of the evidence, a trier of fact can find the driver “altered the normal movement of traffic.” State v. Chen, 266 Or App 683, 688, 338 P3d 795 (2014).

Defendant appealed conviction of DUII (ORS 813.010). Defendant assigned error to the denial of a motion to suppress evidence found after he was stopped for impeding traffic (ORS 811.130). On appeal, Defendant argued the officers did not have probable cause for the underlying traffic stop because he was only blocking one lane of traffic and two lanes remained open, thus not “impeding traffic” under meaning of the statute. A driver impedes traffic under ORS 811.130 if a by a preponderance of the evidence, a trier of fact can find the driver “altered the normal movement of traffic.” State v. Chen, 266 Or App 683, 688, 338 P3d 795 (2014). The Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not err because there was probable cause to stop Defendant’s vehicle for impeding the normal flow of traffic. Affirmed.

Advanced Search