ip.82nd.ave439.jpg

Cracking down on prostitution along 82nd Avenue has long been a focus of Portland police. In this 2008 file photo, police question a suspected john after he picked up a teen-age girl along Southeast 82nd Avenue.

(Jamie Francis/The Oregonian)

The Oregon Court of Appeals on Thursday threw out the conviction of a woman arrested for doing little more than walking down 82nd Avenue and glancing over her shoulder.

The ruling underscores the thin line between smart police work and trampling of citizen's rights.

drew applause from defense attorneys who say police often overstep their bounds in stopping and arresting law-abiding residents in their quest to fight

.

Portland police, however, testified that the defendant in this case -- Sharita J. Martin -- exhibited many of the tell-tale signs of women working as prostitutes.

On March 8, 2010, officer Heath Kula watched Martin walk along 82nd Avenue from 9:45 to 10:50 p.m. as she repeatedly looked over her shoulder at passing traffic. She wore high-heeled boots, a mini-skirt and a puffy jacket.

At one point, she took a step or two toward a pick-up truck that had pulled aside, but she turned away without talking to the driver. The officer testified he believed that Martin saw him and his unmarked patrol car then.

A short while later, the officer saw Martin talk to a known prostitute for 30 to 45 seconds.

The officer also discovered from a records check that Martin, whom other officers recognized by name, had been arrested seven or eight times under suspicion of prostitution-related activity from 2004 to 2006. But she hadn't been arrested for prostitution in the four years since.

The officer then arrested Martin under suspicion of unlawful prostitution procurement activity and attempted prostitution.

Martin's defense attorney, Harry Carson, argued that the trial court judge should throw out statements and evidence police collected after Martin was stopped and arrested. The fact that his 23-year-old client looked over her shoulder as she walked wasn't suspicious, the defense attorney said.

Rather, it was completely normal because "criminal activity does happen on 82nd Avenue and a young woman walking alone at night should be darn well aware of her circumstances," Carson said.

Multnomah County Circuit Judge Leslie Roberts declined the defense's requests. Martin was found guilty in May 2010 of prostitution procurement.

Martin appealed, represented by public defender Kali Montague.

Thursday, the appeals court found that police didn't have probable cause to arrest her. Specifically, the court found that police violated Martin's constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.

"Notably, defendant did not engage in the conduct that would have most strongly indicated that she was working as a prostitute: She did not move quickly toward any vehicle, even though she had the opportunity to do so," the appeals court wrote.

Carson, the defense attorney, said Thursday that it's the first time he's seen an Oregon appeals court tackle the issue of whether walking along a street and looking at cars gives police enough ammo to arrest someone on prostitution charges.

Thursday's ruling came as welcome news to Lisa Pardini, a public defender who represented Martin after trial. Pardini said the circumstances surrounding Martin's arrest are typical of many other cases she's seen.

"There's nothing special or peculiar other than they (the defendants) happen to be on 82nd Avenue and the cops want to approach them," Pardini said. "... I've actually had clients arrested wearing sweats."

Martin's case also is reminiscent of the case of

, a Portland Community College writing instructor who in 2007 was arrested under suspicion of prostitution-related activity after two officers -- including Kula -- watched her walk along Southeast 82nd Avenue wearing a hooded sweatshirt, knee-length skirt and Crocs shoes. Police thought they saw her making eye contact with passing drivers and walk toward an SUV that pulled over.

Prosecutors quickly dropped the case, and Selby won a $5,000 settlement from the city in 2009.

In Martin's case, prosecutors have the option of retrying the case, although that is unlikely given the lack of admissible evidence.

-- Aimee Green