Legal Opinion

State v. Fong

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 19, 2009No. D043657T, A130371PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, P. J.

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII). Relying on State v. Jayne, 173 Or App 533, 24 P3d 920 (2001), defendant asserts that the trial court erred in admitting the results of a urine test indicating the presence of Valium and marijuana metabolites in his urine when the results of the test were not confirmed with a quantitative test. Because we conclude that a quantitative test is not required for the evidence at issue to be admissible in a DUII case, we affirm.

On August 27, 2004, after observing defendant’s vehicle cross over the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. WebbOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State v. SampsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  3. State v. ChipmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  4. State v. JayneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  5. State v. MoodyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. MazzolaOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  2. State v. KochCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  3. State v. TripathiCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  4. State v. HlebechukCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  5. State v. MazzolaOregon Supreme Court · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API