314 P.3d 984
Or. Ct. App.2013Background
- Officer Carter stopped defendant for a registration violation after learning it was expired; defendant’s license was suspended and she was cited for driving while suspended.
- Morrill, acting as cover officer, obtained defendant’s consent to search the car during an unavoidable lull in the traffic stop.
- Morrill began searching; defendant voiced concern about looking in the back (clothes) area and Morrill terminated his search.
- Carter remained at the scene, issued the citation, and, after questioning, obtained defendant’s consent to search the car; Carter then conducted a glove-compartment search that yielded methamphetamine and pipes.
- Defendant moved to suppress the results, arguing the search violated state and federal warrants; the trial court denied the motion, ruling the Carter search was authorized by Morrill’s prior consent.
- On appeal, the court held that Morrill’s consent did not authorize Carter’s subsequent search because the consent expired when Morrill terminated his search; Carter’s search required its own separate consent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Carter’s search was authorized by consent to Morrill’s search | State: Morrill’s consent authorized Carter’s search. | Duncan: Morrill’s consent expired; Carter’s search was independent. | Consent to Morrill did not authorize Carter. |
| Whether Morrill’s consent was tainted by unlawful stop extension | State: stop tolerated an unavoidable lull; consent valid. | Duncan: no lawful break; consent tainted by second-stop concerns. | Consent valid at Morrill’s time, but expiration matters separate Carter’s search. |
| Whether Carter’s second search violated Article I, section 9 | State: consent from Morrill (during lull) justified Carter’s search. | Duncan: Morrill’s consent expired; Carter needed independent consent. | Carter’s search not justified by Morrill’s consent; warrantless search unconstitutional. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ehly, 317 Or 66 (1993) (review of suppression findings on constitutional grounds)
- State v. Davis, 295 Or 227 (1983) (per se reasonableness of warrantless searches; exceptions required)
- State v. Weaver, 319 Or 212 (1994) (consent as warrant exception; voluntariness and taint standard)
- State v. Rodgers, 219 Or App 366 (2008) (unavoidable lull permits consent inquiries during a lawful stop)
- State v. Rodriguez, 317 Or 27 (1993) (consent must be voluntary and not tainted by unlawful police conduct)