State v. K.A.M.

A juvenile offender's age and homeless status are not relevant to determine whether a police interaction constituted a stop. A stop does not occur when, without some other show of authority, a law enforcement official asks to see identification or to search for contraband.

Youth appealed delinquency judgment, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. On appeal Youth argued that the evidence in question was unlawfully obtained in violation of his rights against unreasonable search and seizure under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. Namely, Youth argued that he was stopped by the officer who conducted the search because he, a seventeen-year-old homeless youth, subjectively felt he was not free to leave when officers entered his room and asked for identification. The Court of Appeals held that Youth’s age and homeless status were not relevant to determine whether he was stopped under Article I, section 9. In addition, the Court held that without “some other show of authority, a person is not seized when an officer asks to see a person’s identification” or search for contraband. Affirmed.