Legal Opinion

State v. Gonzalez

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 26, 2003No. CF010351; A115416PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Per curiam

After a trial to the court, defendant was convicted of supplying contraband. ORS 162.185. Defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by concluding that he voluntarily introduced contraband into the Umatilla County Jail when, while in possession of methamphetamine, police took him there after arresting him. Defendant is correct that his mere possession of drugs when he was taken by police to a correctional facility is not legally sufficient to prove that he voluntarily introduced contraband into that facility. See State v. Tippetts, 180 Or App 350, 43 P3d 455 (2002). That is so even…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. TippettsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  2. State v. AndrewsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  3. State v. DelaneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  4. State v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. State v. ForresterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  2. State v. BarboeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  3. State v. EatonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  4. State v. EatonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  5. State v. McCantsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009

18 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