Oregon Supreme Court - May 31, 2013

by: Sonja Good Stefani, Zara Lukens and Abassos • May 31, 2013 • no comments

Seizure of Victims/Witnesses Lawful

Ordering a potential victim or witness out of her home and detaining her for questioning constitutes a seizure because it significantly intrudes on her liberty. Such a seizure is lawful if (1) the officer reasonably believes that an offense involving danger of forcible injury to a person recently has been committed nearby; (2) the officer reasonably believes that the person has knowledge that may aid the investigation of the suspected crime; and (3) the detention is reasonably necessary to obtain or verify the identity of the person, or to obtain an account of the crime. In this case, detaining the victim of suspected domestic violence on the porch of her house was a constitutionally lawful seizure because her aborted 911 call, the anger of her husband at the door, and the bruise on her face gave officers probable cause to believe her husband assaulted her. Because the officers reasonably suspected that she could provide information about the crime they were permitted to stop and detain her for temporary questioning. State v. Fair, 353 Or __ (June 5, 2013).

Evidence of Defendant’s Sleepwalking Relevant to Establish Lack of Voluntary Act for DUII

Evidence of a defendant’s sleepwalking is relevant to show that the defendant did not voluntarily drive his vehicle, as required to establish liability for the offense of DUII. Such evidence, therefore, cannot be excluded at trial. ORS 801.020(7) (stating that the vehicle code governs the construction of and punishment for vehicle code offenses) does not prohibit application of ORS 161.095(1) (requiring a voluntary act or omission to establish criminal liability) to the offense of DUII. Additionally, the absence of a voluntary act requirement in the text of ORS 813.010 (defining felony DUII) does not express a legislative intent to dispense with the requirement. State v. Newman, 353 Or __ (June 5, 2013).