Oregon Supreme Ct - Oct 6, 2016

by: Sara Werboff • October 10, 2016 • no comments

Search and Seizure - Defendant Has a Possessory Interest in Undelivered Mail and Seizure was Unlawful

The court concludes that, under Article I, section 9, police unlawfully seized a package addressed to defendant and defendant was entitled to suppression of evidence discovered as a result. In this case, police officers pulled a package addressed to "Maxi-pad Barnt" from the stream of mail and set it aside for a dog sniff. The dog alerted. The police then took the package to the address, and eventually contacted defendant by phone. The officer asked for consent, telling defendant that if he did not give consent, the police would apply for a warrant. Defendant consented, and the police found cash in the package. The police then asked defendant for consent to search his home for evidence of drug trafficking or money laundering. Defendant consented to that as well, and police found substantial amounts of marijuana, among other incriminating evidence.

On review, the court first determines that a person has a possessory

State v. Barnthouse, 360 Or 403 (2016) (Brewer, J.)