Legal Opinion

State v. Meharry

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 21, 2006No. CC CFH030171; CA A124222; SC S52988PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*175KISTLER, J.

Police officers searched defendant’s van without a warrant after arresting her for driving under the influence of intoxicants. At issue in this case is whether that search came within an exception to the warrant requirement of Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. The trial court concluded that it did not, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. State v. Meharry, 201 Or App 609, 120 P3d 520 (2005). For the reasons set out below, we reverse.

We state the facts consistently with the trial court’s factual findings and its decision granting defendant’s motion to suppress. See…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. California v. CarneySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. State v. StevensOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  4. State v. HolmesOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. State v. William L. Witt(074468)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2015
  2. State v. Kurokawa-LasciakOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  3. State v. BonillaOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  4. State v. McCarthyOregon Supreme Court · 2021
  5. State v. Fessenden / DickeOregon Supreme Court · 2014

40 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