Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Hoggans

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 8, 1978No. 17-424 C.A. 8678Published

1DissentLee, J.

I would affirm because, in my opinion, the officer had both a reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify the stop (ORS 131.615) and probable cause accompanied by exigent circumstances justifying the warrantless search. Such arose from the officer’s observation of the "bag of clothes in the car” and the "tag hanging out of the shirt” which was the kind "you would normally find while the clothes were on the sales rack.” These incriminating observations distinguish this case from State v. Valdez, 277 Or 621, 561 P2d 1006 (1977), on which the defendant relies.

The officer testified, "I followed…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. ValdezOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  2. State v. WillisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  3. State v. CrockettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
  4. State v. FeehelyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  5. State v. GilbertCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API