Legal Opinion

State v. Conway

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 14, 1984No. DUC 5367; CA A32361PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

Defendant appeals from his conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants, ORS 487.540, contending that his constitutional right of confrontation was violated by the trial court’s admission, under a hearsay exception, of Intoxilyzer certifications. We affirm.

In State v. Smith, 66 Or App 703, 675 P2d 510 (1984), we held that Intoxilyzer certifications are admissible as public records exception to the hearsay rule. OEC 803(8)(b). We did not discuss the constitutional argument which is being raised by defendant in this appeal. Shortly thereafter, we summarily decided State v. Sparks,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Gladden v. LonerganOregon Supreme Court · 1954
  2. State v. SaundersOregon Supreme Court · 1886
  3. State v. MarshOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Gaines v. RelfSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
  5. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. NormanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  2. State v. RuizNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1995
  3. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  4. State v. OfaHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. State v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API