State v. Jones

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED: December 30, 2015 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. KABLE LEVI JONES, Defendant-Appellant. Douglas County Circuit Court 12CR2546FE A156414 Ann Marie Simmons, Judge. Submitted on November 17, 2015. Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Emily P. Seltzer, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and David B. Thompson, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Hadlock, Judge, and Allen, Judge pro tempore. PER CURIAM Reversed and remanded. 1 PER CURIAM 2 Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for one count of unlawful 3 possession of methamphetamine, ORS 475.894. He contends that the trial court erred in 4 denying his motion to suppress evidence of the methamphetamine, which the police 5 discovered and seized, during a traffic stop, in a warrantless search of a cigarette pack 6 belonging to defendant. The state concedes that the trial court erred "because, contrary to 7 the trial court's conclusions, neither the warrantless search of defendant's pockets (which 8 revealed the cigarette pack) nor the subsequent warrantless search of the cigarette pack 9 was justified under any exception to the warrant requirement" of Article I, section 9, of 10 the Oregon Constitution.1 We agree with the state that the record does not support the 11 trial court's finding that defendant consented to the search of the cigarette pack; we also 12 agree that the evidence therefore should have been suppressed. Accordingly, we reverse 13 and remand. 14 Reversed and remanded. 1 Article I, section 9, provides, in part: "No law shall violate the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search, or seizure[.]" 1

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.