State v. Hiner
240 Or. App. 175
Or. Ct. App.2010Background
- Consolidated appeal challenging two convictions: possession of cocaine (ORS 475.884) and probation violation for cocaine possession.
- Stop occurred during an investigation of defendant's sister and brother-in-law, who were intoxicated after a domestic dispute in a casino parking lot.
- Deputy ran a computer check indicating defendant was on probation for cocaine possession and lacked a valid driver’s license.
- Deputy observed eyes red and watery, smelled alcohol on breath, and noted defendant admitted drinking and denied probation; defendant hesitated and denied being on probation.
- Probation officer advised that probation conditions could require consent to a search; deputy sought consent, which defendant gave; search yielded contraband.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the stop was justified by reasonable suspicion | State argues deputy had reasonable suspicion based on probation and drinking. | Hiner contends stop lacked reasonable suspicion and violated Article I, section 9. | Yes; stop justified by reasonable suspicion. |
| Whether deputy had statutory authority to stop for probation violation | State relies on ORS 137.545(2) arrest authority implying stop authority. | Hiner argues no authority to stop for probation violation. | Yes; deputy had authority to stop under ORS 137.545(2). |
| Whether consent to search was voluntary | Search consent was voluntary given the circumstances. | Consent obtained under potential coercion related to probation status. | Yes; consent was valid. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Cunningham, 337 Or. 528 (2004) (reasonable grounds for stop; standard for reviewing suppression)
- State v. Ehly, 317 Or. 66 (1993) (gestures toward reasonable suspicion; factual findings binding if supported)
- State v. Hall, 339 Or. 7 (2005) (stop justified when officer says suspect not free to leave)
- State v. Warner, 284 Or. 147 (1978) (three-tier framework for encounters: arrest, stop, mere questioning)
- State v. Steinke, 88 Or.App. 626 (1987) (arrest authority implies stop authority upon reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Ingman, 127 Or.App. 27 (1994) (mistaken belief can still support reasonable suspicion)
- State v. Davis, 133 Or.App. 467 (1995) (probationer’s right to refuse search; evidence of voluntariness)
- State v. Dunlap, 215 Or. App. 46 (2007) (opportunity to refuse consent to search)
- State v. Chilson, 219 Or.App. 136 (2008) (officer's belief may be objectively reasonable even if incorrect)
- State v. Tiffin, 202 Or.App. 199 (2005) (probation terms and reasonableness of belief about restrictions)