Legal Opinion

State v. Langevin

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 26, 1986No. 146,798; CA A36402PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant appeals his conviction for criminally negligent homicide, contending that the police did not have authority to draw blood from him while he was unconscious, and that, if they did have such authority, they were required to obtain a warrant before analyzing his blood several days later for alcohol content.

We hold that the police did have the authority to take a sample of defendant’s blood. Former ORS 487.835(2); State v. Heintz, 286 Or 239, 594 P2d 385 (1979); State v. Calderon, 67 Or App 169, 678 P2d 1245, rev den 297 Or 272 (1984). That statute also authorized the testing of the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. LowryOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  2. State v. HeintzOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  3. State v. WestlundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
  4. State v. CalderonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. MilliganOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State v. LangevinOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  4. State v. MilliganOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  5. State v. MilliganCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API