Oregon Appellate Court - July 17, 2013

by: Sonja Good Stefani, Zara Lukens and Abassos • July 17, 2013 • no comments

<summary/hidden>

• Automobile Exception - Vehicle Need Not Be Mobile at Time of Stop
• Defendant can waive counsel without understanding all potential defenses

</summary>

Automobile Exception - Vehicle Need Not Be Mobile at Time of Stop

So long as a vehicle is mobile when police “encounter it in connection with the crime” at some point prior to the stop, and the police have probable cause, the automobile exception applies. Here, police encountered the vehicle when defendant drove into a parking lot and parked in a set-up drug exchange location. Because police bought drugs from the defendant in the same vehicle several days prior and defendant agreed to participate in a second buy at this location, the "encounter" of the vehicle occurred "in connection with a crime." Therefore, police had authority to conduct a warrantless search of the vehicle and attached trailer under the automobile exception, despite waiting until after the car was parked and defendant exited the car to initiate the stop. State v. Finlay, 257 Or App__ (July 17, 2013)

Defendant can waive counsel without understanding all potential defenses

A defendant can validly waive counsel without understanding all potentially available defenses, as long as the record otherwise establishes that the waiver is voluntary and intelligent. Here, the defendant in a resisting arrest case argued that he had not validly waived his right to counsel where he didn’t know that an unlawful arrest is not a defense to resisting arrest. The court rejects this argument because defendant understood, when he waived counsel, that an attorney would likely have more nuanced legal knowledge than the defendant. State v. Lubbers, 257 Or App __ (July 17, 2013).