History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Lorenzo
335 P.3d 821
Or.
2014
Read the full case

Background

  • The Court considers whether evidence found during a voluntary consent search must be suppressed when consent followed an unlawful police entry into the home.
  • An officer reached inside the apartment and knocked on the bedroom door, pursuing welfare concerns after a 9-1-1 call.
  • The Court of Appeals held the entry unlawful and suppressed the later search under the Hall exploitation framework.
  • The Supreme Court adopts the Unger framework for exploitation, focusing on voluntariness, the unlawfulness’ nature, proximity, intervening/mitigating factors, and whether taint was purged.
  • The Court finds the unlawful entry was brief and limited, no immediate incriminating information was obtained prior to consent, and defendant voluntarily consented.
  • Therefore, the evidence from the consent search is admissible and the Court reverses the Court of Appeals; trial court’s ruling affirmed.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether consent was tainted by exploitation of unlawful entry Lorenzo argues taint from illegality compelled suppression Lorenzo contends consent was voluntary and not exploitation-driven Consent not the product of exploitation; evidence admissible
Whether the unlawful entry violated Article I, section 9 and affected consent Lorenzo asserts violation tainted subsequent consent Consent still voluntary despite unlawful entry Unlawful entry did not meaningfully taint consent under totality of circumstances
Whether mitigating factors would purge the taint Unger suggests possible purging via intervening factors Mitigating factors absent or insufficient to purge taint No mitigating/intervening factors necessary to suppress; but taint not established

Key Cases Cited

  • State v. Hall, 339 Or 7 (2005) (exploitations analysis revised; burden on state to show voluntariness)
  • State v. Unger, 356 Or 59 (2014) (redefines exploitation; totality of circumstances; purpose and flagrancy considered)
  • State v. Musser, 356 Or 148 (2014) (exploitation after unlawful stop; suppression warranted)
  • State v. Hemenway, 353 Or 129 (2013) (modifies exploitation framework; warnings encouraged)
  • State v. Lorenzo, 252 Or App 263 (2012) (Court of Appeals decision on emergency aid and link to taint)
  • State v. Unger, 356 Or 59 (2014) (describes limited intrusion factors and significance of taint)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Lorenzo
Court Name: Oregon Supreme Court
Date Published: Aug 28, 2014
Citation: 335 P.3d 821
Docket Number: CC C100238CR; CA A145826; SC S060969
Court Abbreviation: Or.