Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
State v. Guggenmos
Citations: 253 P.3d 1042; 350 Or. 243; 2011 Ore. LEXIS 393Docket: TC 0500398CR; CA A133266; SC S057378
Court: Oregon Supreme Court; May 5, 2011; Oregon; State Supreme Court
Original Court Document: View Document
On May 5, 2011, the Supreme Court of Oregon reviewed the case of State of Oregon v. Bobby Lee Guggenmos, reversing the Court of Appeals' affirmation of Guggenmos' conviction for possession of a controlled substance. The court found that the trial court had erred in denying Guggenmos' motion to suppress evidence obtained from a police search of his bedroom, which was conducted without a warrant under the pretense of a "protective sweep." The incident occurred on February 9, 2005, when Detective Mogle of the Oregon State Police searched Guggenmos' bedroom based on information from an unnamed informant alleging drug activity at the residence. Mogle had previously attempted to buy drugs at the location but did not confirm any successes. He also connected the house to another location associated with individuals who had outstanding warrants. Corporal Deese of the Klamath Falls Police Department contributed to the search based on vague prior knowledge of the residence as a "drug house" and later provided misleading testimony about a resident's criminal background. The court concluded that the evidence should have been suppressed, leading to the reversal of both the lower court's judgment and the appellate decision, with the case remanded for further proceedings. Justices Kistler and Linder dissented, while Justices Gillette and Landau did not participate in the decision. Mogle requested Deese's presence alongside Officer Morrison to investigate a residence on Third Street through a "knock and talk" approach, aiming to determine the presence of individuals with outstanding warrants without a specific target in mind. Upon arrival, Mogle and Morrison, in plainclothes, approached the front door while Deese, in uniform, positioned himself at the back. Mogle knocked, identified himself and Morrison, and was permitted entry into the living room, where Tidwell, an adult woman, and a child were present. Mogle informed Tidwell of his concerns regarding wanted individuals and requested to search the house. Tidwell denied the presence of any wanted persons, stating only his girlfriend, her child, and someone named "Sam" were there, but consented to the search. Tidwell accompanied Mogle through the residence, displaying cooperation and maintaining a conversational demeanor.