- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
- Date Filed: 05-05-2021
- Case #: A167831
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Lagesen, P.J. for the Court; Powers, J., & Hadlock, J. pro tempore.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed convictions for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), unlawful possession of heroin, and unlawful possession of a controlled substance. Defendant assigned error to the lower court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence of his performance on the administered field sobriety tests (FSTs). On appeal, Defendant argued that after invoking his Miranda rights, the police officer unconstitutionally interrogated him by asking him to perform the FSTs. In response, the State argued that because FST’s are not testimonial, the Defendant’s Miranda rights had not been violated. The Court disagreed and concluded that Defendant was impermissibly interrogated when the police officer requested that he perform the FSTs after he invoked his Miranda rights. Therefore, asking for consent to search, including requesting that a suspect perform FSTs, constitutes impermissible interrogation unless the law precludes the use of the person’s refusal against that person at trial. Reversed and remanded.