Legal Opinion

State v. Stonaker

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 10, 1997No. D9507598M; CA A93687PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, J.

The state appeals from a pretrial order suppressing evidence of statements the complainant made to a 9-1-1 operator and to a police officer. See ORS 138.060(3). The trial court concluded that those statements did not fall within the “excited utterance” exception to the hearsay rule. OEC 803(2). We conclude that the 9-1-1 call statements did satisfy the requirements of OEC 803(2) but that the complainant’s subsequent statements to the investigating officer did not. Accordingly, we reverse in part and affirm in part.

Defendant is charged with assault in the fourth degree, ORS 163.160,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. CarlsonOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  2. State Ex Rel. Oregon Health Sciences University v. HaasOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  3. People v. OjedaColorado Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. State v. AppersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. HassonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  2. State v. RumaryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  3. State v. UnderwoodCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API