STATE v. SHEELY (2007)

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Brian Ray SHEELY, Defendant-Appellant.

D053273M; A131060.

Decided: December 19, 2007

Before EDMONDS, Presiding Judge, and WOLLHEIM and SERCOMBE, Judges.

Garrett A. Richardson filed the brief for appellant. Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Jamie K. Contreras, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for felon in possession of a restricted weapon, ORS 166.270(2), and assigns error to the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence discovered during a warrantless search of his folding pocketknife. The state concedes that, under State v. Dickerson, 135 Or.App. 192, 195-96, 898 P.2d 193 (1995), the opening of a closed pocketknife constitutes a search under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution, where nothing about the exterior of the knife indicates that the knife is not of a type that can be legally possessed. The state further concedes that the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress because the record contains no evidence that the officer had probable cause to believe that defendant possessed a restricted weapon when the officer seized defendant's knife from the outside of his pants pocket and opened it. We agree with the state and accept its concessions.

Reversed and remanded.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network