State v. Mock

Under Article I, Section 9 of the Oregon Constitution, police cannot obtain reasonable suspicion to conduct a search during a traffic stop unless their inquiry questions are reasonably related to the initial infraction; without reasonable suspicion, subsequently collected evidence must be suppressed.

Defendant was convicted of conspiracy to deliver oxycodone. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidenced from a traffic stop. After monitoring defendant for two weeks, police later pulled over Defendant for a traffic infraction, and then performed a search of the vehicle. Defendant argued that there was an unlawful extension of the traffic stop, and the police did not have reasonable suspicion to support further questioning. Under Article I, Section 9 of the Oregon Constitution, police cannot obtain reasonable suspicion to conduct a search during a traffic stop unless their inquiry questions are reasonably related to the initial infraction; without reasonable suspicion, subsequently collected evidence must be suppressed. The Court of Appeals held that the trial court erred. The court reasoned that because the policy inquiry about Petitioner’s travel plans was not reasonably related to the initial stop, police did not have reasonable suspicion to convert the initial traffic stop into a criminal drug investigation. Accordingly, any evidence discovered via the illegal search must be suppressed. Reversed and remanded.