Legal Opinion

State v. Tucker

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 9, 2000No. CF95-0539; CA A90706; SC S45431PublishedCited by 58 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRiggs, J.

In this criminal case, defendant seeks review of his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. ORS 166.270(1). He contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence seized in a warrantless search of an automobile in which he was a passenger. The Court of Appeals affirmed. State v. Tucker, 151 Or App 775, 951 P2d 190 (1997). On reconsideration, the Court of Appeals adhered to its earlier opinion. State v. Tucker, 154 Or App 187, 959 P2d 632 (1998).

In this court, defendant argues that the trial court erred both on constitutional and statutory grounds.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. TannerOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. State v. MortonOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Leo v. KeislingOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  4. State v. HerrinOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State v. TuckerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997

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

3Cited by58 opinions

  1. State v. UngerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State v. AshbaughCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. State v. CookOregon Supreme Court · 2001
  4. State v. GuggenmosOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  5. State v. HemenwayOregon Supreme Court · 2013

53 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