Legal Opinion

State v. Hammonds

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 2, 1998No. 96-11-38355; CA A98063; 96-11-38356; CA A98064PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

The state challenges a trial court order suppressing statements made by defendants after the car in which they were traveling was pulled over for a traffic infraction. Specifically, the state contends that, because the officer who stopped defendants reasonably suspected that they had committed or had agreed to commit the crimes of prostitution and promoting prostitution, he was authorized to expand the scope of the traffic stop to investigate those crimes. Hence, the trial court erred in suppressing the statements obtained as a result of the expansion of the traffic stop. We agree.1

Although…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. EhlyOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. Dominguez-MartinezOregon Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State v. BeltOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State v. AguilarCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. State v. MartinOregon Supreme Court · 1998

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State v. MitcheleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  2. State v. CardellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  3. State v. HamesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  4. State v. DampierCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. State v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017

11 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