Defendant was convicted of possession of a controlled substance, ORS 475.894, and appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found when his jacket was searched. The state concedes that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to suppress. As explained below, we conclude that the state’s concession is well taken. Accordingly, we reverse and remand.

Defendant was the driver of a vehicle that was lawfully stopped for several traffic infractions. The officer who made the stop determined that the vehicle needed to be impounded. While inventorying the contents of the vehicle, the officer found defendant’s jacket, searched it, and located drug-related materials in a pocket.

The parties agree that the search of the jacket was not authorized by any inventory policy, and that the circumstances presented no “officer safety” concern that justified searching the jacket. Under the circumstances of this case, we agree that the search of defendant’s j acket violated Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution.

Reversed and remanded.