State v. Decker

A traffic stop extension requires reasonable suspicion of a specific crime or type of crime. State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 182, 389 P3d 1121 (2017).

Defendant appealed judgment of conviction for unlawful possession of methamphetamine and felon in possession of a restricted weapon. Defendant assigned error to the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence found after officers stopped his vehicle for a traffic violation. On appeal, Defendant argued that the evidence should have been suppressed because officers found it after extending the traffic stop on suspicion that Defendant was engaged in unspecified criminal activity. In response, the state argued that the record supported a determination that the officer reasonably suspected that Defendant was engaged in criminal activity before he stopped processing the traffic citation, and instead, had begun a criminal investigation. Under State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 182, 389 P3d 1121 (2017), a stop's extension requires reasonable suspicion of a specific crime or type of crime. The Court of Appeals held that since the record did not support a finding that the officers reasonably suspected Defendant had committed either of the specific crimes that the state contended were the basis for the extension of the stop, the trial court erred in denying Defendant’s motion to suppress. Reversed and remanded.