State v. Hebrard
260 P.3d 759
Or. Ct. App.2011Background
- June 2008, LoJack signal shows stolen truck; four people (including Hebrard) near truck in driveway; officer handcuffs four suspects after safety concerns; defendant drops a key fob which lights the Infinity SUV when pressed; wallet search and non-weapon findings occur; inconsistent name/age signals lead to belief of deception; SS card with different name reveals an outstanding parole warrant; Miranda warnings follow; defendant makes 'rodeo' remark; charges include unauthorized use of vehicle, possession of stolen vehicle, identity theft, false information, unlawful entry; trial court denies suppression and convicts on Counts 1, 2, 4, acquits Count 5, with Count 3 acquittal; issues on stop/arrest and taint of evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether handcuffing converted stop to arrest | State: handcuffs justified for safety; stop remained stop | Hebrard: handcuffs converted stop into arrest, tainting evidence | Arrest occurred; handcuffing converted stop into arrest |
| Probable cause to arrest for unlawful use of a vehicle | State: proximity to stolen truck and movement signals probable cause | Hebrard: no specific evidence he drove or used the vehicle; not more likely than not | No probable cause; arrest unlawful, suppression proper |
| Attenuation of tainted evidence by outstanding warrant | State: outstanding warrant purges taint; admissibility follows arrest | Taylor rationale rejects purge where search occurred before lawful arrest | Purging taint rejected; evidence remains suppressed |
| Attenuation of key fob discovery from prior illegality (Crandall) | State: voluntary drop/kick of key fob attenuates connection | Crandall not applicable; key fob discovered during unlawful arrest | No attenuation; key fob suppressed due to link to unlawful arrest |
| Suppression scope and exclusionary rule | Reversed and remanded for suppression of all evidence obtained as a result of unlawful arrest |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lambert, 134 Or.App. 148 (1995) (analysis of suppression standard for stop vs. arrest)
- State v. Ehly, 317 Or. 66 (1993) (totality-of-circumstances approach to stops/arrests)
- State v. Medinger, 235 Or.App. 88 (2010) (stop-to-arrest conversion factors; safety considerations)
- State v. Morgan, 106 Or.App. 138 (1991) (stop vs. arrest; officer safety and continued restraint)
- State v. Taylor, 151 Or.App. 687 (1997) (taint from unlawful arrest; suppression of evidence before lawful arrest)
- State v. Crandall, 340 Or. 645 (2006) (attenuation doctrine; but not here due to pre-arrest discovery)