Legal Opinion

State v. Stroup

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 19, 1997No. 95CRM0040; CA A91562PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

Defendant was charged with driving while under the influence of intoxicants (DUII). ORS 813.010. She moved to suppress the evidence of what occurred after her vehicle was stopped on the ground that the arresting police officer did not have probable cause to administer field sobriety tests under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. See State v. Nagel, 320 Or 24, 31, 880 P2d 451 (1994) (holding that the administration of field sobriety tests constitutes a search within the meaning of section 9). The trial court allowed her motion, and the state appeals. We affirm.

In reviewing an…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  2. State v. OwensOregon Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State v. O'KeyOregon Supreme Court · 1995
  4. State v. NagelOregon Supreme Court · 1994

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. CardellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  2. State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  3. State v. DicksonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  4. State v. StephensCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  5. State v. KirschCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007

6 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