State v. Miser

“The circumstances of a case may give rise to probable cause to search several different locations at the same time, particularly where, as here, the evidence sought may be at once in more than one location.” State v. Villagran, 294 Or 404, 413, 657, P2d 1223 (1983).

Defendant appealed a conviction from his conditional guilty plea to multiple charges related to an illegal drug operation. On appeal, defendant challenged the sufficiency of probable cause contained in one of the affidavits submitted for a search warrant of his place of work. “The circumstances of a case may give rise to probable cause to search several different locations at the same time, particularly where, as here, the evidence sought may be at once in more than one location.” State v. Villagran, 294 Or 404, 413, 657, P2d 1223 (1983). The Court first recognized that in general, an affidavit needed to make a showing that “‘more than a mere possibility, but less than a certainty’ that the items will be found in one of the specialized places.” State v. Wilson, 178 Or App 163, 35 P3d 1111 (2001). The Court then observed that the police had sufficient evidence in monitoring defendant’s movements, phone activity, and behaviors to believe that the defendant was involved in the illegal distribution of drugs. From those activities were instances where the defendant drove the company van to his home, where there had been probable cause to search for evidence of drug crimes, and to a local AutoZone, where a known drug distributor was shopping. In the totality of the circumstances, defendant’s behavior lead to a reasonable conclusion that evidence of an illegal drug operation would be found at defendant’s place of work.

Affirmed.