State v. Lipka

To determine whether a warrantless search is lawful, it must be “reasonable to believe that evidence reasonably related to the crime of arrest could be concealed in the location being searched.” State v. Hernandez, 299 Ore. App. 544, 550-51 (2019).

Defendant appeals convictions for felon in possession of a firearm, menacing, and harassment. Defendant assigned error to the denial of his motion to suppress evidence acquired during a warrantless search. On appeal, Defendant argued that any search of the bag where a gun was found would not reveal evidence to support the menacing charge. In response, the State argued that the gun found during the search could be used as evidence to support the menacing charge. To determine whether a warrantless search is lawful, it must be “reasonable  to  believe  that  evidence  reasonably  related  to  the crime of arrest could be concealed in the location being searched.” State v. Hernandez, 299 Ore. App. 544, 550-51 (2019). The Court reasoned that the determination is fact-based. In this case, the officers did not have reason to believe that the gun found in the bag during the search was used in the commission of the alleged harassment or menacing and mere speculation is not a reasonable belief. The Court held that becuase the officers had merely speculated that Defendant used a gun in the commission of the alleged menacing, the denial of Defendant’s motion to suppress was erroneous. Reversed and remanded.