From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Rottenkolber

Oregon Court of Appeals
Aug 6, 2008
190 P.3d 494 (Or. Ct. App. 2008)

Opinion

Nos. CM0620334; A132728.

Submitted July 3, 2008.

August 6, 2008.

Appeal from the Benton County Circuit Court, David B. Connell, Judge.

Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Anne Fujita Munsey, Senior Deputy Public Defender, Legal Services Division, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.

Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Douglas F. Zier, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Landau, Presiding Judge, and Schuman, Judge, and Ortega, Judge.


PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded.


Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for felon in possession of a restricted weapon. ORS 166.270(2). He assigns error to the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence found in his backpack following his arrest pursuant to an inventory policy that required police to inventory all property removed from a person before the person's belongings may be placed in secure storage at the police station. He contends that the inventory policy was unlawful in that it authorized police to search all closed containers, not just those designed for, or likely to hold, valuables. The state concedes that the policy is unlawful and that the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress on that ground. We agree with defendant and accept the state's concession. State v. Eldridge, 207 Or App 337, 341, 142 P3d 82 (2006) (inventory policy may not require search of all containers in an impounded vehicle regardless of whether the container is normally associated with holding valuables).

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

State v. Rottenkolber

Oregon Court of Appeals
Aug 6, 2008
190 P.3d 494 (Or. Ct. App. 2008)
Case details for

State v. Rottenkolber

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. KYLE LLOYD ROTTENKOLBER…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Aug 6, 2008

Citations

190 P.3d 494 (Or. Ct. App. 2008)
190 P.3d 494

Citing Cases

State v. Cherry

In its brief, the state does not defend Policy 3315, and at oral argument the state expressly conceded that…