466 P.3d 1034
Or. Ct. App.2020Background:
- Defendant was riding a bicycle with a backpack when deputies arrested her on an outstanding failure-to-appear warrant.
- Officers removed the backpack from defendant, placed her in handcuffs, and Sergeant Bowman put the backpack on his patrol-car hood and searched it.
- Bowman searched the bag pursuant to Washington County’s inventory policy; the search produced a coin purse and a glass pipe with methamphetamine residue.
- Defendant moved to suppress, arguing the backpack had been seized without a warrant and no exception to the warrant requirement applied; the state conceded seizure but argued the seizure was lawful incident to arrest/in light of no third party present.
- The trial court denied suppression, defendant pleaded to stipulated facts and was convicted; defendant appealed.
- The Court of Appeals reversed: removal of the backpack constituted a seizure under Article I, section 9; the state failed to prove a recognized exception justified the warrantless seizure; the error was not harmless.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of warrantless seizure of backpack | Arrest itself authorized seizure of items on arrestee (no third party present to take them) | Removing the backpack was a warrantless seizure not justified by any exception | Seizure occurred when officers removed the pack; arrest alone does not authorize seizure of all personal effects; state failed to show an exception, so seizure was unconstitutional |
| Harmlessness of erroneous denial of suppression | Evidence should be admissible (state implied error was harmless) | Admission resulted from unconstitutional seizure and must be suppressed | Error was not harmless on this record; conviction reversed and case remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jones, 286 Or App 562 (2017) (standard of review for motions to suppress)
- State v. Fulmer, 366 Or 224 (2020) (definition of a seizure and burden to prove warrant exceptions)
- State v. Stinstrom, 261 Or App 186 (2014) (inventory exception can justify searches but not separate seizures)
- State v. Lowry, 295 Or 337 (1983) (lawful arrest does not permit exploratory seizure of unrelated personal effects)
- State v. Owens, 302 Or 196 (1986) (clarification limiting Lowry’s holding)