Legal Opinion

State v. Lay

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 6, 2011No. C081500CR; A140702PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, P. J.

Defendant was tried and convicted for possession of methamphetamine. ORS 475.894. On appeal, he assigns error to the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained from what he contends was an unlawful stop. We conclude that defendant was unlawfully stopped, but that the connection between that unlawful stop and the discovery of the disputed evidence — an inculpatory statement by defendant — was sufficiently attenuated to negate the need for suppression. We therefore affirm.

Although some key facts were disputed at the motion to suppress hearing, the trial court resolved…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 2005
  2. State v. AshbaughOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  3. State v. TuckerOregon Supreme Court · 2000
  4. State v. ThompkinOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. AylesOregon Supreme Court · 2010

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. RutledgeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. State v. DampierCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  3. State v. RossCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  4. State v. ParkerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. State v. AcunaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

7 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