State v. Brown

The State appealed the trial court's order to suppress evidence that was acquired after a sheriff's deputy stopped Defendant. The State assigned error to the trial court’s conclusion that the deputy had lacked reasonable suspicion that Defendant had committed a crime. On appeal, the State argued that the deputy's suspicion that Defendant had committed unlawful entry into a motor vehicle was objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances existing at the time of the stop. “The articulated facts need not support certainty that a suspect is engaged in criminal activity; rather, based on those specific facts, ‘a reviewing court must [be able to] conclude that the officer’s subjective belief could be true, as a matter of logic.’” State v. Fuller, 296 Or App 425, 429 (2017) quoting State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 184 (2017). The Court held that the deputy's suspicion was objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances because the deputy knew that a criminal activity has occurred; it was late at night, Defendant’s appearance matched that of the reported suspect, and Defendant was the only one in the immediate area of where the crime had taken place.

Reversed and remanded.