) modified
and adhered to as modified March 10, 2021
STATE OF OREGON,
Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
HARRY CREIGHTON BEESON,
Defendant-Appellant.
Curry County Circuit Court
17CR12539; A166382
Cynthia Lynnae Beaman, Judge.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Mark Kimbrell, Deputy Public Defender, Office
of Public Defense Services, for petition.
Before DeHoog, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Chief Judge,
and Mooney, Judge.
PER CURIAM
Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and
adhered to as modified.
788 State v. Beeson
PER CURIAM
This case is before us on defendant’s petition for
reconsideration of our opinion in State v. Beeson,
(2020), in which we affirmed the trial
court’s denial of defendant’s motion to suppress the results
of his breath test. Defendant contends that we misread State
v. Swan,
(2018), and that the fact that
Katter read the implied consent form to defendant weighs
against, rather than in favor, of suppression. We agree that
our opinion, at
307 Or App at 825
, describing subsequent
events that may have dissipated the taint of the earlier
Miranda violation should be modified to remove Katter’s
reading of the implied consent form to defendant as one of
those subsequent events. We reject defendant’s remaining
contentions and modify the first paragraph at
307 Or App
at 825
to read as follows:
“Two significant events occurred between the Miranda
violation and the consent for breath test that weigh against
suppression: (1) Hodencamp read defendant his Miranda
rights and, while doing so, prevented defendant from interrupting so that he could finish the Miranda warnings and
obtain defendant’s acknowledgment that he understood
the warnings; and (2) the officers transported defendant to
another location, the police station.”
Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified
and adhered to as modified.
