Legal Opinion

State v. Heckathorne

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 2009No. CC 050014CR; CA A128670; CC 050015CR; CA A128671; SC S056073PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, C. J.

The state seeks review of a Court of Appeals decision that reversed a trial court order denying defendants’ motion to suppress evidence. As in State v. Luman, 347 Or 487, 223 P3d 1041 (2009), the issue in this case involves the intersection between the warrant requirement in Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution, set out post, 347 Or at 482, and the scope of police authority respecting items that are lawfully in police possession. Here, the question more specifically is whether the police must obtain a search warrant to determine the contents of an opaque metal cylinder lawfully in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. United States v. JacobsenSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. State v. OwensOregon Supreme Court · 1986
  4. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  5. State v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1998

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. HoldorfOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State v. MansorOregon Supreme Court · 2018
  3. State v. FulmerOregon Supreme Court · 2020
  4. State v. NewcombOregon Supreme Court · 2016
  5. State v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

9 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