State v. Hitchcock
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtSercombe, J.
Following a denial of their motion to suppress evidence, defendants Hitchcock and Winters pleaded guilty to charges of possession of a controlled substance and frequenting a place where controlled substances are used, kept, or sold. Former ORS 475.992(4)(b) (2003), renumbered as ORS 475.840(3) (2005); ORS 167.222. Defendants assign error to the denial of their motion to suppress evidence of drugs and drug paraphernalia seized during a search of their bedroom. Defendants argue that Winters was unlawfully detained by police and that her consent to search the bedroom and her incriminating…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
- State v. EhlyOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. KennedyOregon Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. HolmesOregon Supreme Court · 1991
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. HuggettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- State v. LayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
- State v. BarnthouseCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- State v. ChambersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- State v. HemenwayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.