Legal Opinion

State v. Mazzola

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 26, 2013No. 101198M; A148224PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDuncan, J.

In this criminal case, defendant appeals the judgment convicting her of driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), ORS 813.010. Defendant assigns error to the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress evidence resulting from a police officer’s warrantless administration of field sobriety tests (FSTs). Like the trial court, we conclude that the administration of the FSTs did not violate defendant’s rights under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution1 because it was supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances. Therefore, we affirm.

We review a trial court’s…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. EhlyOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. StevensOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  3. State v. NagelOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State v. MacHucaOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  5. State v. MilliganOregon Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. MazzolaOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  2. State v. SullivanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  3. State v. RaymondCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  4. State v. MazzolaOregon Supreme Court · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API