Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Bost

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 12, 1992No. 89-3565-C-3, 89-3564-C-3 CA A63879 (Control), A64175Published

1DissentRichardson, J.

The majority analyzes the order of suppression on three bases and concludes that it was correct. I disagree with *525much of the analysis and the summary conclusion, and I dissent.

It first bears stating that the evidence which was suppressed was seized by authority of a warrant to search for and seize methamphetamines. The trial court held that the warrant was valid. The evidence seized and the statements of the defendants were suppressed, because the court found a violation of ORS 133.575(2). The violation was that the officers, after banging on the side of the mobile home and stating that they…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  2. State v. ValentineOregon Supreme Court · 1972
  3. State v. FordOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  4. State v. BishopOregon Supreme Court · 1980
  5. State v. ArceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986

2 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