Legal Opinion
Gildroy v. Motor Vehicles Division
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided June 13, 1990No. 8805-02824; CA A50042PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.
Appellant has moved for reconsideration of our opinion in Gildroy v. MVD, 100 Or App 538, 786 P2d 757 (1990). We allow the motion and modify our former opinion.
We said:
“Respondent [the driver] argues that the judgment can be affirmed, because he was denied his right under Article 1, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, to a ‘meaningful conversation’ with his attorney before deciding whether to submit to the test. See State v. Spencer, 305 Or 59, 750 P2d 147 (1988). He asserts that the officer stood by his side during his conversation with his attorney and eventually interrupted it. The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Middendorf v. HenrySupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- State v. SpencerOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. RatliffOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- Moore v. STATE, MOTOR VEHICLES DIV., ETC.Oregon Supreme Court · 1982
- Shakerin v. Motor Vehicles DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gildroy v. Motor Vehicles DivisionOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Gildroy v. Motor Vehicles DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
- Webb v. State ex rel. Department of Public SafetyCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1992
- Hoefling v. Motor Vehicles DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
- Merrifield v. Motor Vehicles DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.