State v. Snuggerud
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, J.
The state appeals the trial court’s order suppressing defendant’s post-arrest statements and the results of an Intoxilyzer test. The state argues that defendant’s statements made to a police officer were admissible because, regardless of whether defendant was properly warned of his constitutional rights upon arrest, defendant volunteered the statements. Further, the state argues, inter alia, that the results of the Intoxilyzer test should have been admitted because the arresting officer complied with all the requirements for administering the Intoxilyzer test, including the 15-minute pre-test…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- State v. LyonOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- State v. HilditchCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
- State v. GableCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. WillieNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2009
- Buchholz v. North Dakota Department of TransportationNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. ThompsonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2009
- State v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
- State v. RingsrudNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002