State v. Sullivan

"To determine whether an officer's belief was objectively reasonable, we consider the totality of the circumstances presented to the officer and reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those circumstances. State v. Keller, 280 Or. App. 249, 253 (2016). For traffic infractions, an officer's subjective belief is objectively reasonable, "if...the facts as the officer perceived them actually satisfy the elements of a traffic infraction." State v. Tiffin, 202 Or. App. 199, 204 (2005).

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for driving with a revoked license, assigning error to the trial court's denial of her motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop. Defendant argued that the officer lacked probable cause to justify the stop because it was not objectively reasonable for the officer to assume that she owned the unregistered vehicle she was driving. "To determine whether an officer's belief was objectively reasonable, we consider the totality of the circumstances presented to the officer and reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those circumstances. State v. Keller, 280 Or. App. 249, 253 (2016). For traffic infractions, an officer's subjective belief is objectively reasonable, "if...the facts as the officer perceived them actually satisfy the elements of a traffic infraction." State v. Tiffin, 202 Or. App. 199, 204 (2005). The Court reasoned that the probable cause standard does not require an officer to eliminate all alternative lawful explanations, such as the possibility that Defendant was driving another person's vehicle. The Court held that it was objectively reasonable for the officer to assume that the driver of a vehicle was its owner; as such, the officer had probable cause for the traffic stop. Affirmed.