State v. Brock

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for two methamphetamine offenses. He assigns error to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress drug-related evidence discovered in the car he was driving. He argues that the evidence was obtained in violation of his rights under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution because the automobile exception should not properly apply under the circumstances of this case.1 We review the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress for legal error and are bound by the trial court’s express and implicit findings of fact, if there is…