State v. Owens

The main issue presented by State v. Owens, 302 Or 196, 729 P2d 524 (1986), State v. Forseth, 302 Or 233, 729 P2d 545 (1986), and State v. Westlund, 302 Or 225, 729 P2d 541 (1986), is whether a warrant is required to open a transparent container and chemically analyze its contents. That issue could have been resolved in the affirmative with a simple reference to State v. Lowry, 295 Or 337, 667 P2d 996 (1983), but today the court holds that a warrant is not required.

Such a reversal deserves explanation, but it is not to be found in the majority’s opinion.1 The majority confronts neither Lowry…