Legal Opinion
State v. Scheidemann
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided December 11, 1968PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, J.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction of the crime of illegal possession of narcotics.
The sole assignment of error is the trial court’s refusal to suppress evidence (marijuana) seized under a warrant which defendant contends was not supported by an adequate affidavit. The affidavit read as follows :
“STATE OF OREGON )) ss.
County of Lane )
“AFFIDAVIT FOR SEARCH WARRANT
“I, Guy D. Mattoon, having been duly sworn on oath hereby depose and say as follows:
“That I am a member of the Eugene, Oregon, Police Department and that in connection with my duties as a Detective Sergeant with the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. IngramOregon Supreme Court · 1968
3Cited by11 opinions
- Peterson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
- State v. KittredgeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
- State v. LovatoNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1994
- State v. BlackCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
- State v. KoppenhaferCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.