State v. Nichols
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the Court
ARMSTRONG, R J.
Defendant appeals his judgment of conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), ORS 813.010. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence because the police officer who stopped him lacked reasonable suspicion that he was committing DUII and, hence, the officer violated Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution1 and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution2 by stopping him. We conclude that, under the totality of the circumstances observed and articulated by the officer, the officer’s stop of defendant…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. HoldorfOregon Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. McNeelyOregon Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. MacielCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
- State v. AlvaradoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
- State v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. ClinkCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- State v. McHaffieCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- State v. DendyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
- State v. HlebechukCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025