State v. Delong

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court held that voluntary consent to search may attenuate the taint from a failure to provide Miranda warnings in violation of Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution. In determining whether physical evidence derived from an unwarned custodial question must be suppressed, courts consider the nature of the violation, the character of the consent, and the causal relationship between the violation and the evidence. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. Voluntary consent or an invitation to search can attenuate the taint of a failure to give Miranda warnings in violation of Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution.
2. Delong's invitation to search his vehicle attenuated the taint of the unwarned question, so the physical evidence found in the vehicle did not derive from the Article I, section 12, violation.
3. The Court of Appeals must decide whether the search exceeded the scope of Delong's invitation. If it did not, the physical evidence and post-warning statements are presumably admissible; if it did, the Court of Appeals must determine whether the belated Miranda warnings rendered the statements admissible.

Questions Presented

1. Whether physical evidence discovered during a consent search derived from an admitted violation of Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution when the defendant was questioned in custody without Miranda warnings and then invited the search.
2. Whether the Court of Appeals should decide in the first instance whether opening the fanny pack exceeded the scope of Delong's invitation to search.
3. If the search exceeded the scope of consent, whether Delong's post-warning statements were admissible.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded