State v. Reyes-Herrera

Article I, section 9, of the Oregon constitution protects the people’s right to move freely in the world, with assurance that their liberty will not be significantly restrained without reasonable suspicion that they engaged in criminal activity.

Defendant was arrested and charged with unlawful possession of methamphetamine. Defendant moved to suppress the evidence and argued that the officer who searched him lacked reasonable suspicion in violation of Article I, section 9. Defendant claimed that the arresting officer accused him of committing a crime which effected a stop. The State contended that, even if there was suspicion, "an officer does not seize a person when the officer does not actually make an accusation, but, instead, asks questions to gain an understanding of the present circumstances." Article I, section 9, of the Oregon constitution protects the people’s right to move freely in the world, with assurance that their liberty will not be significantly restrained without reasonable suspicion that they engaged in criminal activity. The Court examined other cases and noted that "distinctions may be relevant when a court considers the totality of the circumstances, but no one fact is determinative, and context is critical." The Court concluded that the officer's questioning would cause a reasonable person to assume they must remain there and respond. The Court reasoned that the officer had only a hunch that Defendant had been engaged in a drug deal and still subjected him to search. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.