Legal Opinion

State v. Swan

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 21, 2018No. CC 130242160; SC S064016PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKistler, J.

**123Defendant was arrested for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) and advised of his Miranda rights. In response, he invoked his right to counsel. Afterwards, the arresting officer asked defendant 28 DUII interview questions and then asked if he would consent to a breath test. Defendant moved to suppress his answers to the 28 questions and all derivative evidence, which he argued included his decision to take the breath test and the test results. The state, for its part, conceded that asking defendant the 28 DUII interview questions after he had invoked his right to counsel…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. Missouri v. SeibertSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. Birchfield v. N. Dakota. William Robert BernardSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
  5. Outdoor Media Dimensions Inc. v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 2001

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. State v. WardOregon Supreme Court · 2020
  2. State v. BeesonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  3. State v. BeesonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  4. State v. SavinskiyOregon Supreme Court · 2019
  5. State v. MastCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020

17 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