Legal Opinion
State v. Backstrand
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided November 21, 2013No. CC C071116CR; CA A136163; SC S058019, S058318PublishedCited by 100 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*394LINDER, J.
In two recent cases, we have held that officers who had lawfully seized individuals for purposes of investigation also could, consistently with Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution, request and verify the individuals’ identifications. In particular, in State v. Fair, 353 Or 588, 609, 302 P3d 417 (2013), we held that an officer may temporarily detain a person whom the officer reasonably suspects of being a material witness to or victim of a recent or ongoing crime. We further held that, under the circumstances of that case, the officer constitutionally could request the…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- California v. Hodari D.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. DelgadoSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brendlin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by100 opinions
- State v. UngerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. AndersonOregon Supreme Court · 2013
- Dep't of Human Servs. v. A. B. (In Re J. B.)Oregon Supreme Court · 2018
- State v. HighleyOregon Supreme Court · 2013
- State v. Rodriguez-PerezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
95 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.