State v. Wicks

Reasonable suspicion exists “when an officer can point to specific and articulable facts that give rise to a reasonable inference that the defendant committed or was about to commit a specific crime or type of crime.” State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 165, 389 P3d 1121 (2017).

That inference must be “objectively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances known to the officer.” State v. Bradley, 329 Or App 736, 741, 542 P3d 56 (2023).

Defendant was convicted of unlawful possession of methamphetamine, ORS 475.894.  Defendant assigned error to the court’s denial of his motion to suppress.  Defendant argued the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to question Defendant about drug use, the question was unrelated to the initial traffic stop and therefore unlawful.  The State argued the trooper had reasonable suspicion to ask about drug use based on Defendant’s driving and physical demeanor.  Reasonable suspicion exists “when an officer can point to specific and articulable facts that give rise to a reasonable inference that the defendant committed or was about to commit a specific crime or type of crime.” State v. Maciel-Figueroa, 361 Or 163, 165, 389 P3d 1121 (2017).  That inference must be “objectively reasonable in light of the totality of the circumstances known to the officer.” State v. Bradley, 329 Or App 736, 741, 542 P3d 56 (2023). The Court found the officer’s observations - Defendant’s physical symptoms of shaking and his truck being stuck in a ditch- together provided sufficient reasonable suspicion of DUII.  The Court held the officer did not unlawfully expand the scope of the traffic stop.  AFFIRMED.