Legal Opinion

State v. Ford

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 18, 1989No. 10-87-01668; CA A45907PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*3BUTTLER, J.

Defendant appeals his conviction for unlawful possession of a controlled substance, ORS 475.992, assigning error to the trial court’s failure to suppress evidence obtained in the course of a search allegedly conducted in violation of the “knock and announce” rule, ORS 133.235, and the Fourth Amendment. We agree that the search constituted a statutory violation that requires suppression and reverse.

Eugene Police Officer Nauta stopped defendant and a woman while they were in a car in which defendant was a passenger. Nauta asked defendant and the woman for their names and addresses.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  3. State v. ValdezOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. State v. ValentineOregon Supreme Court · 1972
  5. State v. BrockOregon Supreme Court · 1982

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. FordOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. StalbertCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
  3. State v. ArnoldCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  4. State v. SwaffordNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1989
  5. State v. FordCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989

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