Legal Opinion

State v. Durbin

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 13, 2003No. CR980102; CA A105880; SC S48501PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBalmer, J.

Defendant was charged with driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII). 1 He moved to suppress the results of his breath test, arguing that the presence within earshot of the arresting officer when he consulted a lawyer by telephone before taking the breath test violated his right to counsel under the Oregon Constitution. The trial court denied defendant’s motion to suppress the results of the breath test, and he was convicted after a trial to the court based on stipulated facts. In an en banc decision, the Court of Appeals affirmed, with four judges dissenting. State v. Durbin, 172 Or…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Priest v. PearceOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State v. SpencerOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  4. State Ex Rel. Oregon Health Sciences University v. HaasOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  5. State v. JancsekOregon Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  2. State of Iowa v. John Arthur Senn Jr.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2016
  3. State v. VeatchCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  4. State v. DinsmoreOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. SwanOregon Supreme Court · 2018

32 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