STATE OF OREGON v. ART MURPHY II

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ART C. MURPHY, II, Defendant-Appellant.

A161058

Decided: May 03, 2017

Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and Lagesen, Judge. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Sara F. Werboff, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Leigh A. Salmon, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals a judgment convicting him of felon in possession of a firearm, ORS 166.270, and unlawful possession of methamphetamine, ORS 475.894. He assigns error to the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence, arguing that the police search of his camp trailer exceeded the scope of the search warrant under which the police conducted their search.1 The state concedes the error, acknowledging that the affidavit supporting the search warrant failed to “establish a nexus between the objects sought and the place to be searched.” State v. Tidyman, 54 Or App 640, 643-44, 635 P2d 1355 (1981), rev den, 292 Or 722 (1982); see State v. Thibodeaux, 173 Or App 353, 357, 22 P3d 248 (2001) (“When * * * the building or vehicle is owned or occupied by persons other than those suspected of criminal activity, more is required than proximity [to the suspect's home].”). We agree with the state, accept the state's conces-sion that the motion to suppress should have been granted, and reverse and remand the judgment.

Reversed and remanded.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Defendant also raises other assignments of error. Given our disposition, we need not reach those assignments.

PER CURIAM