State v. Foster
252 P.3d 292
Or.2011Background
- After a lawful stop for a traffic violation, police used a drug-detection dog to sniff the car; the dog alerted at the driver’s side door handle.
- A search of the car revealed methamphetamine residue on a pipe inside a fanny pack, leading to arrest for possession.
- Evidence at suppression hearing focused on Benny’s reliability as a drug-detection dog trained with the play-reward method and certified by OPCA.
- OPCA certification is private with no statutory standards; Benny’s training showed both initial certification and later recertification.
- Defendant challenged Benny’s reliability based on the training method and potential for residual odors, arguing no probable cause warranted a search.
- The Oregon Supreme Court held that a properly trained and reliable drug-detection dog can provide probable cause, requiring an individualized totality-of-circumstances inquiry.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a drug-detection dog alert can provide probable cause | Foster argues Benny's alert can support probable cause if reliable | Foster contends dog odor alerts are inherently unreliable | Yes; alert can provide probable cause |
| Reliability of Benny's training method | OPCA certification and training support reliability | Woodford criticizes play-reward; imprinting more reliable | Reliability depends on totality of circumstances; not per se unreliable |
| What factors constitute the individualized inquiry | Training, certification, and field performance suffice | Additional factors needed beyond training/certification | Totality of circumstances governs; no fixed factor list required. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Smith, 327 Or. 366 (1998) (drug-detection dog alert contributing to probable cause)
- State v. Anspach, 298 Or. 375 (1984) (probable cause based on totality of circumstances)
- Brown v. State, 301 Or. 268 (1986) (automobile exception and probable cause standard)
- Coffey v. State, 309 Or. 342 (1990) (probable cause same as warrant reliance; admissibility not binding on probable cause)
- Villagran v. State, 294 Or. 404 (1983) (probable cause assessment with multiple possible locations)
- State v. Carter/Grant, 316 Or. 6 (1993) (probable cause and reasonable belief with non-certainty)
- State v. Westlund, 302 Or. 225 (1986) (probable cause with innocent explanations considered)