State v. Rodriguez
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*29GILLETTE, J.
In this criminal case, the trial court denied defendant’s pretrial motion to suppress evidence seized during a warrantless search of defendant’s apartment following his arrest. On appeal from defendant’s subsequent conviction, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that “[djefendant’s consent to the search was obtained by exploitation of illegal police conduct” and that, therefore, the motion to suppress should have been granted. State v. Rodriguez, 110 Or App 544, 551, 823 P2d 1026 (1992). We conclude that defendant’s consent was not obtained by…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Gibbons v. OgdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Abel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Maryland v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by135 opinions
- State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. AshbaughOregon Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. NagelOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. UngerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. FairOregon Supreme Court · 2013
130 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.