Legal Opinion

State v. Hickmann

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 12, 1975No. 18692PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPort, J.

Defendant was charged with criminal activity in drugs, ORS 167.207. He filed a motion to suppress evidence seized by the police coincidentally with his warrantless arrest within his domicile and search thereof. The court allowed the motion and the state appeals, ORS 138.060(4).

In such an appeal it is elementary that the findings of fact of the trial judge, if supported by substantial evidence, are binding on this court. State v. Johnson/Imel, 16 Or App 560, 571, 519 P2d 1053, Sup Ct review denied (1974). It is also clear that a search of a man’s domicile and entry therein in the absence of a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1974
  2. State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. State v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
  4. State v. BraccoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. HickmannOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State v. PellerOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  3. State v. ParrasCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1981
  4. State v. CameronCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975
  5. State v. CameronCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975

1 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