Legal Opinion

State v. McCormack

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 6, 1988No. S87-101; CA A44482PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeits, J.

The state appeals a pretrial order that excluded evidence of an Intoxilizer test, because the person who administered the test did not testify. The state argues that the testimony of another qualified Intoxilizer operator who observed the administration of the test is an adequate foundation for the introduction of the test results. We agree and reverse.

Defendant was arrested for driving under the influence of intoxicants and was given an Intoxilizer test by Deputy Ackerman, who was not available to testify on the day of defendant’s trial. However, Officer Stein, who was qualified to…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. WestCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  2. State v. WidermanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
  3. Carney v. Motor Vehicles DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
  4. State v. WidermanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API