State v. Bowen

"The reasonable-suspicion standard ‘is met when an officer can point to specific and articulable facts that give rise to a reasonable inference that the defendant committed…a specific crime...’ State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 165, 389 P3d 1121 (2017). The officer must have a subjective belief that is objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. State v. Kreis, 365 Or 659, 665, 451 P3d 954 (2019).”

Defendant was convicted of unlawful delivery of marijuana and appealed. Defendant assigned error to trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress. He argued that when he was stopped by the police officer, the stop was extended without evidence to support reasonable suspicion, and thus a motion to suppress should be granted under Article I, section 9 of Oregon’s Constitution. “The reasonable-suspicion standard ‘is met when an officer can point to specific and articulable facts that give rise to a reasonable inference that the defendant committed…a specific crime...’ State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 165, 389 P3d 1121 (2017). The officer must have a subjective belief that is objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances.  State v.  Kreis, 365 Or 659, 665, 451 P3d 954 (2019).” The trooper relied upon the scent of marijuana, it was a known area for crime, and defendant had attributes that the trooper associated with drug traffickers (rental car). The Court found that the evidence supplied by the trooper was not enough to establish reasonable suspicion. Reversed and remanded.