Legal Opinion
State v. Baumeister
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided August 13, 1986No. 85-0367 (D01), 85-0367 (D02); CA A36520PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*628RICHARDSON, P. J.
In this consolidated appeal, defendants appeal their convictions for burglary in the first degree. ORS 164.225. Their sole contention is that the trial court erred in denying their motion to suppress evidence that the police seized from defendant Jeffery Baumeister’s car without a search warrant. We hold that the police searched the car and seized the evidence with his consent and affirm.
Defendants had been arrested as suspects in the burglary for which they were convicted, and Jeffery was in custody at the police station when a police officer requested permission to search…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Escobedo v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State v. LarsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- State v. VondehnCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
- State v. BradburyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
- State v. PauldoSupreme Court of Georgia · 2020
- State v. NorkeveckCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.