Legal Opinion
State v. Maxfield
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided May 24, 1995No. 90CR0576; CA A80109PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLandau, J.
The state moves for reconsideration of our opinion, State v. Maxfield, 133 Or App 371, 891 P2d 1342 (1995), claiming that we erred in construing or applying the law. ORAP 6.25(l)(e). We allow the motion, modify our opinion and adhere to it as modified.
In our opinion, we said:
“According to the state, the fact that defendant dropped off the film containing pictures of marijuana permits ‘the reasonable inference’ that she took the pictures home. We remain unpersuaded. First, the state fails to explain why a photograph of a marijuana plant, by itself, constitutes seizable evidence. The state…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Warden, Maryland Penitentiary v. HaydenSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- State v. SchroederCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
- State v. EvansCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- State v. O'KEEFECourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
- State v. SevenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. GoodeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
- State v. MunroCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
- State v. GoodeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
- State v. MunroCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
- State v. UsherCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.