Oregon Appellate Court 08-03-11
by: Abassos • August 2, 2011 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Miranda - Mirandized Confession Following a Non-Mirandized Confession
- Cruel and Unusual Punishment
- Stop - Free to Leave
- Arrest - Placing a Suspect in Handcuffs/Probable Cause
- Criminal Mistreatment I - Contractual Agreement
- TPR - Whether condition of parent is "seriously detrimental"
Miranda - Admissibility of Mirandized Confession that Follows a Non-Mirandized Confession
A Mirandized confession is admissible even though it follows a non-Mirandized confession if the various factors set forth in VonDehn are met. Here, the Mirandized confession was part of an hour long interrogation at the police station and the prior non-mirandized confession occurred as part of the arrest. Thus,
the differences in the extent, timing, and location of the questioning and in the police personnel conducting the questioning were sufficient "objective indication[s] that the situation had changed and was governed by new rules."
Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The moral sense of reasonable people would not be shocked by a 70 month sentence for a Robbery II in which defendant pointed a gun at a store clerk; even though he was 17 with no prior criminal history and had an undiagnosed mental disorder which, when treated, returned him to productive and good behavior. State v. Johnson
Stop - Free to Leave
A reasonable person would believe that her freedom was restricted by a police show of authority where an officer asks for identification, runs a warrant check and immediately upon returning starts asking investigative questions. Here the officer started asking about defendant's status as a registered sex offender. On reconsideration in light of State v Ashbaugh, the court comes to the same conclusion. Reversed. State v. Wright
Arrest - Placing a Suspect in Handcuffs/Probable Cause
A suspect may be placed in handcuffs for officer safety concerns as part of a stop. But as soon as the officer safety concerns dissipate the stop becomes an arrest. Here, a lone officer with four suspects had legitimate safety concerns. But when other officers arrived the concerns no longer existed. Thus, an arrest occurred at the point when other officers arrived. No probable cause existed at that time, though lots of evidence was discovered later. The officer had probable cause to believe that one of the four people near a stolen vehicle had committed a UUMV, but he did not have probable cause to believe that any particular person had used the vehicle. State v. Hebrard
Criminal Mistreatment I - Contractual Agreement
A "contractual agreement", for the purposes of Criminal Mistreatment I, means a legally binding contract. Where the agreement is between family members to care for each other by providing monetary support in exchange for caretaking, the presumption is that it is a familial agreement not a legal contract. Here, where defendant assaulted his 70 year old mother who he was caring for in exchange for living expenses, there was insufficient evidence of a legally binding contract. State v. Nolen
TPR - Whether condition of parent is "seriously detrimental"
DHS did not prove that the conditions were seriously detrimental to the children where the state's evidence was that both parents had serious personality disorders, father was a convicted sex offender and mother repeatedly lied to DHS, allowing children to have contact and form a relationship with father. None of these things establish detrimental conditions without more. People with personality disorders, for example, can parent without causing detriment and can even change. A sex offender must be shown to be a risk to the children. Lying to DHS about contact with father would only be detrimental if contact with father was detrimental, which DHS never proved. Reversed. DHS v. HLR and KD
