486 P.3d 28
Or. Ct. App.2021Background
- Trooper Peterson stopped Robinson for speeding after radar recorded 66 mph in a 55 zone; Robinson delayed about a mile before pulling into a Burger King lot.
- On approach Peterson smelled a "very strong" odor of fresh marijuana and observed two bags of marijuana in plain view (about 47 grams total).
- Robinson produced a California ID (no driver’s license) and said the vehicle was a rental; he could not produce the rental agreement and gave a convoluted travel story about shuttling between California and Tacoma, Washington.
- Peterson, with extensive drug-interdiction experience, asked about marijuana, obtained then lost consent to search, and then searched the vehicle claiming probable cause; he found MDMA, cocaine, over 500 oxycodone pills, and $10,000 in cash.
- Peterson arrested Robinson after discovering the trunk contraband; Robinson moved to suppress, the trial court denied the motion, Robinson entered a conditional guilty plea to unlawful delivery of oxycodone and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Robinson) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trooper lawfully expanded the traffic stop to investigate marijuana (reasonable suspicion under OR Art I, §9 and Fourth Amendment) | Facts (delay in stopping, strong odor of fresh marijuana, visible multiple bags, rental car without paperwork, convoluted travel story, lack of license) gave reasonable suspicion of import/export of criminal amounts | Expansion was not supported by reasonable suspicion; odor/other facts insufficient given decriminalization and statutory possession limits | Affirmed: Combined facts (very strong odor, visible bags, rental status, travel story, delay, officer training/experience) amounted to reasonable suspicion to inquire about marijuana |
| Whether the warrantless search was unlawful because it was incident to an illegal arrest | Search was conducted pursuant to probable cause and the automobile exception (search occurred before arrest) | Search was incident to an unlawful arrest and therefore invalid | Court declined to address in depth because defendant did not press automobile-exception challenge on appeal; held search was not incident-to-arrest and denial of suppression affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Arreola-Botello, 365 Or 695 (Oregon Supreme Court 2019) (traffic-stop investigatory inquiries must be reasonably related to the stop’s purpose or independently justified)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 575 U.S. 348 (U.S. Supreme Court 2015) (officer may not prolong traffic stop beyond mission without reasonable suspicion)
- State v. T. T., 308 Or App 408 (Or. Ct. App. 2021) (smell plus additional corroborating facts can supply reasonable suspicion of import/export)
- State v. Bliss, 363 Or 426 (Oregon Supreme Court 2018) (automobile-exception analysis approved in the context of traffic stops)
- State v. Brown, 301 Or 268 (Or. 1986) (establishing Oregon’s automobile-exception principles)
- State v. Bowen, 308 Or App 505 (Or. Ct. App.) (marijuana odor alone, without detail on strength or officer expertise, may be insufficient for reasonable suspicion)