Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Blevins

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 24, 1996No. C94-02-31062; CA A85761Published

1DissentArmstrong, J.

I agree with the majority’s disposition of defendant’s cross-assignment of error, because I agree that the frisk was lawful. I dissent, however, from the decision to reverse the order suppressing evidence of the contents of the container, because the majority applies the wrong test to determine the legality of the seizure of the container. The correct test requires suppression of that evidence, as the trial court held.

ORS 131.625 is the source of authority for a police officer to frisk for weapons a person whom the officer has stopped.1 See State v. Lumpkin, 133 Or App 265, 269-70, 891 *247P2d…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  2. State v. HoskinsonOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State v. AguilarCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  4. State v. KurtzCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  5. State v. BoydCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990

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