Legal Opinion

State v. Fry

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 26, 2003No. 01CR1790FE; A116769PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, J.

Police officers encountered defendant and three companions sitting in a parked car. Also in the car were three syringes that contained methamphetamine residue, as well as several syringes and a drug preparation kit that were not tested. At trial, after the court denied defendant’s motion for a judgment of acquittal and his motion to compel the state to specify which syringe or syringes he allegedly possessed, defendant was convicted of possession of a Schedule II controlled substance. He assigns error to the trial court’s denial of those motions. Because we conclude that the evidence was…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. OareOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  2. State v. CoriaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  3. State v. WrisleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  4. State v. SaudeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
  5. State v. ChandlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. KellerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  2. State v. BordenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  3. State v. KulickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  4. State v. ShermanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  5. State v. TaciaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024

8 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