A8
OFF PAGE ONE
East Oregonian
Wednesday, November 13, 2019
Finding police orders unlawful, Supreme Court reverses conviction
By JAKE THOMAS
Oregon Capital Bureau
SALEM — Determining
that police need more than a
“hunch” to stop citizens, the
Oregon Supreme Court has
reversed a man’s conviction
of interfering with a peace
officer.
The decision, issued last
week, could affect encoun-
ters between police and the
public as well as how courts
respond to such interactions.
The Supreme Court sent the
case back to a lower court for
further proceedings.
A majority of the sev-
en-member court deter-
mined that orders by a Bea-
verton officer for a man to
be handcuffed weren’t law-
ful because police didn’t have
a constitutionally justified
suspicion that he had or was
about to commit a crime.
But a dissenting opin-
ion from Justices Thomas
Balmer and Christopher Gar-
rett argued that the major-
ity’s opinion “muddies the
standards” for police officers
while “needlessly” under-
mining the ability for law
enforcement to address phys-
ical threats.
Ofer Raban, a professor of
law at the University of Ore-
gon School of Law, described
the court’s decision as “very
technical and convoluted”
and wasn’t sure how it would
be applied in trial courts.
He said the court’s deci-
sion wasn’t a “clear declara-
tion” that people aren’t obli-
gated to follow police orders.
“But it creates more
uncertainty for when people
can be held criminally liable
for when they don’t follow,”
said Raban. He added the
decision “muddies the water”
for citizens.
The case
According to court sum-
maries, the case involved
two Beaverton police officers
who in 2014 stopped Eric L.
Kreis as he was standing near
parked cars in a restaurant
parking lot. The parking lot
had been closed for about 20
minutes and had been the site
of frequent car thefts.
Officers stopped Kreis
to see if he was preparing to
break into cars or about to
drive while intoxicated.
Both officers approached
Kreis and asked him for his
name, whether one of the cars
in the parking lot was his and
if he worked for the restau-
rant. Kreis didn’t respond
and stepped away from the
officers, one of whom told
him he was not free to leave
until their investigation was
complete.
Kreis refused to answer
questions. One of the officers
noted that Kreis appeared
angry and showed signs of
intoxication. After other
police arrived, officers again
asked Kreis to answer ques-
tions. Kreis furrowed his
brow, made fists, took a
bladed stance and began
shifting his weight back and
forth while appearing to look
for an escape route, accord-
ing to the court summary.
An officer told Kreis if he
didn’t answer the questions
he would be arrested. Kreis
responded, “I am not going
to be arrested.” Kreis resisted
the officers as he was hand-
cuffed and arrested. He was
charged with interfering with
a peace officer and resisting
arrest.
At trial, Kreis’ lawyer
argued the officer’s order
wasn’t legal because police
had no reasonable suspicion
he had committed or was
about to commit a crime.
Prosecutors argued police
had reasonable suspicion
Kreis was about to drive
impaired or commit theft.
They further argued that
even if the stop was unlawful
the officer’s order for Kreis
to be handcuffed was justi-
fied out of concerns for offi-
cer safety.
The jury found Kreis
guilty of interfering with a
peace officer, but acquitted
him on resisting arrest. Kreis
appealed the conviction to
the Court of Appeals, which
ruled against him, and he
took the case to the Supreme
Court.
Under state law, some-
one commits the crime of
interfering with a peace offi-
cer if they refuse a “lawful
order” made by an officer.
In its decision, the Supreme
Court noted it had previously
defined “lawful order” as an
order that is “authorized by,
and is not contrary to, sub-
stantive law.”
Marc Brown, deputy pub-
lic defender from the office
of Defense Services, rep-
resented Kreis before the
Supreme Court. Brown
argued the officer’s order to
handcuff him was unlawful.
According to the court’s
opinion, Christopher Perdue,
assistant attorney general,
argued police have broad
authority to issue orders that
are only illegal “when they
direct a person to commit
a crime or to refrain from
statutorily or constitutionally
protected activity.”
However, the Supreme
Court ruled the Beaverton
officer didn’t have a “reason-
able belief” that Kreis was
about to drive while under the
influence. The court’s opin-
ion noted that an officer must
have “specific and articulable
facts” to lead them to believe
an individual has committed
or will commit a crime.
The court said a “‘hunch’
based on training and experi-
ence is, by itself, insufficient
to form a basis for reasonable
suspicion.”
The court also rejected
the state’s arguments the offi-
cer gave Kreis a lawful order.
The court reasoned that a
police order is illegal when
it interferes with a person’s
freedom from unreasonable
searches and seizures.
Calls to Oregon Associ-
ation of Chiefs of Police and
Oregon State Sheriffs’ Asso-
ciation were not returned.
The Oregon State Police
directed questions to the Ore-
gon Department of Justice,
which didn’t respond to a
request for comment.
Complaints: Large number of calls involve speeding in neighborhood
Continued from Page A1
sheriff’s call log, time and
time again.
“For the most part, that
does good, and things get
better. But then sometimes
maybe another rig moves
in. That’s just part of the
business, in my opinion,” he
said.
Some of the complaints
are mundane.
A complaint from Oct. 15
states the caller “advised the
Nissan on Brandon (Street)
came around the corner like
it was a racetrack” and went
on to say the person driv-
ing the car did this daily:
“Three or four times in the
morning and then in the
afternoon.”
Others not so much.
In an Oct. 30 incident
regarding a blue or black
Ford pickup truck, dispatch
stated the caller, “thinks
the driver doesn’t have a
license.”
Another time, two calls
from the same day expressed
frustration toward the sher-
iff’s office.
One complaint reads a
caller reported a Pontiac
was speeding in the area.
Staff photo by Ben Lonergan
The Morrow County Sheriff’s Office received more than 85 calls last month to this eight-block
stretch of Southeast Utah Avenue in Irrigon.
The caller told dispatch if
the vehicle came back onto
Division Street, he would
“deal with it himself.” The
sheriff’s office attempted
to get more information but
the call disconnected.
Later that day, a caller
“advised that if (the sher-
iff’s office) did not deal
with” a Dodge pickup that
was running stop signs, “he
would deal with it by caus-
ing a big scene. And that he
would deal with it the way
he did before.”
According to the bulle-
tin, the sheriff’s office was
unable to locate that Dodge
truck.
The calls coming from
Utah Avenue are excessive,
Matlack noted, but emer-
gency calls always take pre-
cedence over these none-
mergency complaints dialed
into dispatch.
According to other area
law enforcement, handling
those nonemergency calls to
dispatch requires walking a
fine line.
The Stanfield Police
Department, which has five
officers, including one for
code enforcement, doesn’t
offer 24/7 response like the
Morrow County Sheriff’s
Office. But Stanfield Police
Chief Bryon Zumwalt finds
value in the issuing of none-
mergency complaints.
“You want people to
report, we want people to be
our eyes and ears,” he said.
But, he said, he wouldn’t
necessarily pay an officer
overtime to go address a
repeated driving complaint
either.
Pendleton Police Chief
Stuart Roberts identified the
challenge of nonemergency
calls as a “delicate dance.”
“A lot of people can’t
make that distinction that our
authority is not unlimited,”
he said. “Obviously a crime
in progress will take prece-
dence over a barking dog.”
But he said the docu-
mentation that occurs when
someone reports suspicious
activity to the police could
sometimes be used to aid a
larger case, which is what
happened with the arrest of
Lukah Chang for the mur-
der of Amy Jane Brand-
hagen, 19, in 2012, and
the attempted murder and
assault of Karen Lange the
following year.
Prior to the murder,
the police had made a few
minor contacts with Chang
since he’d moved to the area
the year before. Roberts said
those run-ins helped speed
up the arrest process later.
He said it’s important to
have patience with those
nonemergency calls.
“It may not seem like a
big deal to you, but for the
person who initiated the
report, it’s the most import-
ant thing for the reporter,”
Roberts said.
The Pendleton Police
Department responds to all
calls for service, but Rob-
erts said that increasing
demands on services, at
least in Umatilla County,
could change that.
“Day or night, four agen-
cies in Umatilla County have
that 24-hour coverage,” he
added. “The community is
acclimated to that.”
Fire: Quick-thinking neighbor rescued the family’s 4 Rhode Island Reds
Continued from Page A1
point as “distraught.”
Neighbors from across the
street took Mya, while Ashly
started rounding up pets —
three dogs and three cats.
“With all the people safe, I
was scared for my pets,” she
said.
At one point, the family’s
13-year-old cat, Tigger, tried
to run back inside.
“We think Tigger ran
back in to see if our daughter
was still in bed,” Ashly said.
“They are very close.”
Ashly grabbed the feline,
but then he disappeared
again. Hours later, they found
him hiding inside a tipped-
over garbage can.
The house is owned by
Ashly’s mother, Deborah
White, who lives there on a
part-time basis and wasn’t
home. The structure was gut-
ted and everything inside
either consumed by fire or
heavily damaged by water or
smoke.
Firefighters
responded
from Pilot Rock, Pendle-
ton, Echo and East Umatilla
County. Umatilla County
Fire District No. 1 Chief
Scott Stanton said the Pilot
Rock Fire Department had
responded to the home on
Oct. 10 for a carbon monox-
ide alarm.
“They determined that the
alarm was not functioning
properly and that there were
no working smoke alarms in
the residence,” he said.
Alarms were recently
installed.
“The combination of a
newly installed smoke alarm
and a neighbor knocking on
the door alerted the residents
to the fire,” Stanton said.
According to Stanton, the
Staff photo by Kathy Aney
A family of three escaped with their lives when their Pilot
Rock home burned Saturday morning. They had just in-
stalled a smoke detector.
cause of the fire was deter-
mined to be a stove burner
that ignited items on the
stovetop.
Numerous photos cov-
ering the living room walls
are now ash. The loss of one
photo in particular distresses
Ashly — the image of her
Italian great-great-grandfa-
ther encased in its original
frame and beveled glass.
A few possessions sur-
vived the fire, including two
iPhones and an iPad in a bed-
room. Mike’s Otterbox case
melted, but his phone sur-
vived. After the fire mar-
shal said it was safe to return,
Ashly dug around for Mya’s
beloved stuffed bear. She
found it on a bed, wet and
covered in charcoal. A neigh-
bor, Mindy Williamson,
laundered it and returned it
smelling faintly of smoke to
a grateful Mya.
Mya’s four Rhode Island
Red chickens survived the
fire because of a quick-think-
ing neighbor. Michael Ford
noticed the laying hens in
their coop connected to the
back of the house and sprayed
them with a garden hose as
the fire burned. The chickens
seem alright. Two of them
laid eggs the next day.
The family is living in a
Pendleton motel, trying to
develop a plan for going for-
ward. They will help Ashly’s
mom deal with the insurance
claim. They’ll concentrate
on finding a new place to
live and figuring out a way
to replace clothing and other
possessions.
“Ashly owns a pair of slip-
pers, a hoodie and a pair of
sweat pants,” said Saman-
tha Hall, a longtime friend
who grew up with Ashly in
Pilot Rock. Hall, now a fire-
fighter in Seaside, spent some
of the weekend setting up a
GoFundMe account (titled
“Staggs family fire”) to help
with expenses.
“Absolutely anything will
help them,” Hall said. “They
are starting from scratch and
even $5 can help buy a pack
of socks.”
Aspen Springs: ‘We tried to
make it as home-like as possible’
Continued from Page A1
In the center of the two
hallways is a lounge area
where patients can play
board games, watch televi-
sion, eat meals or socialize.
A smaller “reflection room”
allows for a quieter atmo-
sphere, and the supervised
courtyard with anti-climb
fencing offers fresh air. There
are also rooms where patients
can meet with their therapist
and/or family members.
Cathey said Lifeways is
“pretty proud” of the hospital.
“It’s somewhere we would
want our family or ourselves
to come here, should the need
arise,” she said. “We tried
to make it as home-like as
possible.”
Before the state does its
final sign-off to open the
facility, it needs to be fully
staffed. Cathey said recruit-
ing positions, such as psy-
chiatrists and masters-level
therapists, can be difficult
in a rural area, so if anyone
is interested in working for
Aspen Springs they should
give Lifeways a call.
She said the hospital will
be staffed around the clock,
with 12-14 staff during the
day and about half that num-
ber at night.
The average patient will
stay five to eight nights.
While Umatilla County resi-
dents in crisis have been sent
out of the area for hospital-
ization in the past, Cathey
said, their discharge will now
be easier to plan while their
therapist, medical provider,
family and friends are in the
same town or county.
“We will serve the entire
state, since psychiatric beds
are at a premium, but the goal
is to serve the community
first and foremost, meaning
Eastern Oregon as a whole,”
she said.
Image courtesy of Cheryl McIntosh, DONE, LLC
The patient lounge at the new Lifeways Aspen Springs Psychiatric Hospital provides a com-
munal space for patients at the facility.