Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 23, 2010No. 070230679; A138276PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrewer, C. J.

Defendant, who was convicted of possession of a controlled substance, ORS 475.840, asserts on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence. The trial court’s factual findings are binding on appeal if there is constitutionally sufficient evidence to support them. State v. Ehly, 317 Or 66, 75, 854 P2d 421 (1993). We therefore review the record, and all inferences that it will support, in the light most favorable to the trial court’s findings. Id. In the absence of express findings, we presume that the trial court decided factual issues in a manner consistent with…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  2. State v. EhlyOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 2005
  4. State v. HolmesOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. AmayaOregon Supreme Court · 2004

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. CourtneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  3. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API