State v. Huffman

Motion to suppress evidence was properly denied where, under the specific facts of a traffic stop, Officer had reasonable suspicion that Defendant had committed a drug-related crime.

Defendant appealed a conviction of unlawful delivery of heroin (ORS 475.850), based on the argument that denial of Defendant's motion to suppress evidence by trial court was in error because Officer unlawfully extended a traffic stop to question Defendant. The Court held that the Officer reasonably suspected that Defendant was committing a drug-related crime. The Court analyzed the specific facts available to the Officer and concluded that his suspicion was reasonable in light of those facts: Defendant was stopped in an area prone to high drug activity; Defendant left his vehicle immediately upon pulling over; Defendant was nervous, would not maintain eye contact, and was visibly shaking; Defendant was on probation for possession of heroin; and Defendant repeatedly made furtive movements towards his sweatshirt pocket despite repeated requests by Officer to keep his hands on the wheel. The Court held that none of these factors alone would give rise to reasonable suspicion, but taken as a whole, led the Officer to reasonably suspect that a drug-related crime was taking place. Affirmed.