Legal Opinion

State v. McArdle

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 18, 1988No. 86-10-08862 & 10-86-08855 CA A43697 (control) & A44420PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

Defendants and several others were charged with conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. Defendants appeal from a denial of their motions to dismiss their indictments on the ground that the government’s conduct was so outrageous that prosecuting them violated their federal due process rights. We affirm.

Because analysis of a due process claim for outrageous government conduct is fact-oriented, we set the facts out in detail. In July, 1986, officers Salsbery, Severns and Koyto began an undercover drug investigation, stationing themselves in a motel in Harrisburg. Salsbery and Koyto testified…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. United States v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Hampton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  4. State v. HartOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  5. United States v. Batres-SantolinoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1981

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. Williams-RuschMontana Supreme Court · 1996
  2. State v. DupreeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  3. State v. DeAngeloCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  4. State v. Williams-RuschMontana Supreme Court · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API