Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Taylor

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 10, 1979No. 78-11-17845, CA 14032Published

1DissentRoberts, J.

I do not agree with the majority that the motion for a continuance was properly denied and therefore respectfully dissent.

The following occurred at trial:

"MR. HUNT: Your Honor, in light of that [granting of state’s motion], the defense would now move for a continuance so we can refile a motion.
"THE COURT: That would be denied.”

As stated by the majority, the trial court’s ruling on a motion for a continuance will not be disturbed unless there is shown an abuse of discretion and prejudice to the accused. Defendant is required by statute to make his Fourth Amendment objection to the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  3. State v. PfliegerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1973
  4. State v. GraberCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API