Legal Opinion

State v. Jaehnig

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 17, 1999No. 97NB0467; CA A99180PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, P. J.

The state in this driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) case appeals a trial court order suppressing evidence of the alcohol content of defendant’s blood. The parties agree that the officer violated ORS 813.140 in obtaining the blood sample and that, under State v. Moylett, 313 Or 540, 836 P2d 1329 (1992), that violation would require suppression. The state argues, however, that ORS 136.432 (section 1 of Senate Bill 936 (SB 936)) has overruled Moylett and similar cases so that statutory violations no longer result in suppression of evidence. Defendant responds that ORS 136.432 is…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Armatta v. KitzhaberOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State v. MoylettOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  4. State v. HoareCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975
  5. State v. FugateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. PeppardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  2. State v. BloomCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  3. State v. DennyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  4. State v. JaehnigCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  5. State v. RileyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API