Oregon Supreme Court reverses Ashbaugh

This wikilog article is a draft, it was not published yet.

by: Abassos • December 8, 2010 • no comments

There was a shift in Oregon search and seizure law this morning when the Oregon Supreme Court reversed the appellate court in State v. Ashbaugh, and in doing so changed the test for how we figure out whether someone is seized. Here's the money graf:

For the foregoing reasons, we believe that it is time to abandon forthrightly the subjective component of that part of the Holmes part (b) test - that is, the part that is concerned with a person's subjective belief that he or she has been seized - and instead to direct the focus of that part of the definition entirely to an objective standard. A "seizure" of a person occurs under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution: (a) if a law enforcement officer intentionally and significantly restricts, interferes with, or otherwise deprives an individual of that individual's liberty or freedom of movement; or (b) if a reasonable person under the totality of the circumstances would believe that (a) above has occurred.

More analysis later as I and others have time to absorb the opinion.