Legal Opinion

State v. Klein

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided August 2, 2012No. CC 070331145; CA A139381; SC S059542PublishedCited by 66 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBalmer, C. J.

This case requires us to decide the meaning of “aggrieved person” as that term is used in ORS 133.721(1), the statute that defines the class of persons who may seek suppression of evidence obtained pursuant to an order for a body wire or wiretap. Defendant was charged with various crimes arising from the murder of Asia Bell. Before trial, defendant filed motions to suppress certain evidence intercepted pursuant to a body-wire order and a wiretap order. Specifically, through the body-wire order the police had obtained conversations that referred to defendant and indirectly suggested that he…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Alderman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State v. JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Pamplin v. VictoriaOregon Supreme Court · 1994

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by66 opinions

  1. State v. McNallyOregon Supreme Court · 2017
  2. Montara Owners Assn. v. La Noue Development, LLCOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  3. State v. WashingtonOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Alfieri v. SolomonOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Schleiss v. SAIF Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 2013

61 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