260 P.3d 662
Or. Ct. App.2011Background
- Defendant Lantzsch was a passenger in a car stopped by a deputy for an illegal turn at 12:35 a.m.; the deputy requested the driver's identification.
- Driver said she had no identification but believed her license was suspended; she stepped out of the car and was spoken to while a records check was run for five to six minutes.
- While the driver was detained, a second deputy arrived; defendant remained in the passenger seat and looked toward the cruiser during the check.
- After arresting the driver on an outstanding warrant and discovering marijuana, the deputy asked defendant to exit the car and speak outside; the deputy did not tell him he was free to leave.
- Defendant complied, walked to the rear of the car, and was asked whether he had weapons or contraband; he disclosed a pocketknife, which led to a search revealing methamphetamine.
- Trial court denied suppression; on remand, the question was whether the encounter constituted a seizure under Ashbaugh II; the Oregon Supreme Court later clarified the seizure standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the deputy's contact after the stop constituted a seizure under Article I, §9 | State: show of authority restrains movement; defendant seized. | Lantzsch: no seizure; not shown to be deprived of liberty. | No seizure under Ashbaugh II. |
| Whether the presence of a second officer created a show of authority | State: second officer's presence supports seizure. | Lantzsch: mere presence does not equal seizure. | Not a seizure; no show of authority. |
| Whether failing to tell defendant he was free to leave affects seizure analysis | State: objective factors show seizure regardless of explicit freedom to go. | Lantzsch: not required to tell freedom to leave; analysis focuses on show of authority. | Not a seizure under Ashbaugh II framework. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashbaugh II, 349 Or. 297 (2010) (abandons subjective component; establishes totality-of-circumstances seizure test)
- State v. Jones, 241 Or. App. 597 (2011) (relevance of show of authority and free-to-leave under Ashbaugh II)
- State v. Courtney, 242 Or. App. 321 (2011) (factors indicating seizure under Ashbaugh II where defendant obeys orders and is not told free to leave)
- State v. Lantzsch, 229 Or. App. 505 (2009) (initial framework: need for independent basis for detention and subjective belief of not being free to leave)