State v. Williams

522 P.2d 1213, 17 Or. App. 513, 1974 Ore. App. LEXIS 1114

Opinions

FOLEY, J.

Defendant was arrested on a prostitution charge. While she was being taken to jail, officers searched her purse and seized a handgun and a small amount of heroin. The gun was in plain sight as soon as the purse was opened. The heroin was inside a folded dollar bill that was inside a zippered interior compartment in the purse. She was charged with prostitution, carrying a concealed weapon and criminal activity in drugs. She was convicted on the weapon and drug charges; the prostitution charge was dismissed. She appeals, contending the handgun and heroin were illegally seized.

Defendant argues that State v. Florance, 15 Or App 118, 515 P2d 195 (1973), Sup Ct review allowed (1974), is controlling. However, we disagree with defendant that this case is controlled by Florance. Here, the arresting officer testified he opened defendant’s purse to search for weapons. This is permitted incident to an arrest. State v. Chinn, 231 Or 259, 373 P2d 392 (1962); State v. Florance, supra. The officer immediately saw a gun. The seizure of the gun was lawful, and defendant does not here claim the contrary.

Defendant instead complains about the officer’s act of continuing to search through the purse, i.e., opening the zippered interior compartment that resulted in the seizure of the heroin. The officer testified he continued to search the purse after seizing the gun because they were looking for other weapons, such as razor blades or a small knife; the officer said it was common, in his experience, for prostitutes to carry such small weapons. This justified opening the zippered interior compartment.

Upon opening the interior compartment, the officer observed a dollar bill folded or rolled in what seemed like a very unusual manner. The officer’s suspicions were aroused because it was also common, in his experience, for prostitutes to carry illegal drugs, and because he had previously seen illegal drugs in powder form carried inside folded paper money. These suspicions prompted the officer to squeeze the dollar bill in defendant’s purse. He could tell by feel that the bill was folded around some kind of powder. Given these circumstances, at that point the officer had probable cause to believe the powder was an illegal drug. State v. Elkins, 245 Or 279, 422 P2d 250 (1966). The seizure of the substance, which proved to be heroin, was lawful.

Affirmed.