Legal Opinion

State v. Hemenway

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 2013No. CC 071107; CA A136981; SC S059085; S059392PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*131BALMER, C. J.

This case requires us to consider once again the circumstances in which a person’s voluntary consent to a search is the result of exploitation of prior illegal police conduct — leading to the exclusion of the evidence obtained— and when it is not. The state charged defendant with possession of methamphetamine. Before trial, defendant filed a motion to suppress evidence seized by the police, arguing that his consent to search was the product of an illegal seizure and, therefore, that the evidence was inadmissible under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution.1 The trial…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Florida v. RoyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Brown v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 2005

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. State v. UngerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State v. HemenwayOregon Supreme Court · 2013
  3. State v. MusserOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  4. State v. LorenzoOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  5. State v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022

18 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