Legal Opinion
State v. Cochran
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided March 6, 1985No. 28160; CA A28994PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWarden, J.
Defendant appeals his conviction after jury trial for murder. ORS 163.115. The primary issue presented is whether the trial court erred in refusing to suppress some or all of the statements defendant made during a seven-hour police interrogation. Under Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 US 218, 226, 93 S Ct 2041, 36 L Ed 2d 854 (1973), and State v. Oakes, 19 Or App 284, 291, 527 P2d 418 (1974), we consider “the totality of the circumstances” in determining whether defendant made the statements voluntarily. In doing so, we may consider only the facts found by the trial court, as supplemented by…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Massiah v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Culombe v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Frazier v. CuppSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Frias v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1986
- State v. AckwardSupreme Court of Kansas · 2006
- State v. VondehnCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
- State v. RoweCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
- City of Portland v. AyersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.