Legal Opinion

State v. Brotherton

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 22, 1993No. 91C-20429; CA A71677PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeits, J.

Defendant was charged with manufacture of a schedule I controlled substance (marijuana), ORS 475.992(1), and unlawful possession of a schedule II controlled substance (cocaine). ORS 475.992(4). He moved to suppress evidence seized during a search conducted pursuant to a search warrant, on the ground that the affidavit supporting the search warrant did not establish probable cause. The trial court granted defendant’s motion, concluding that the affidavit failed to set forth the basis of knowledge and the credibility of the “unwitting informant” and, therefore, did not establish probable cause.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. FarrarOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. VillagranOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  3. State v. AnspachOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  4. State v. MoylettOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  5. State v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. ChezemCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  2. State v. MilksCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  3. State v. PayneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  4. State v. GrimesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  5. State v. KreutzerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995

3 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