Legal Opinion

State v. McClellan

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 13, 2003No. 000850318; A113478Published

1Opinion of the CourtKistler, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. The state concedes that, on the record before it, the trial court erred in denying the motion. It argues, however, that it did not have fair notice that defendant was challenging the validity of his stop (as opposed to his companion’s stop) and should be permitted to introduce additional evidence on that issue on remand. We accept the state’s concession that the motion to suppress should have been granted. We…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. WrightOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API