Legal Opinion

State v. Haney

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 8, 2004No. 00CR0978MI; A116614PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

The state has petitioned for reconsideration, arguing that we erred in describing the manner in which the administrative search issue arose in this case. Although there is no transcript of the suppression hearing, we are now convinced that the issue was discussed at the suppression hearing and did not first arise in the court’s letter opinion in which it explained its decision to deny defendant’s suppression motion. We modify our previous opinion accordingly. However, our conclusion on this point does not affect the result in the case because we conclude that defendant adequately preserved…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. KoroteevCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  2. State v. SnowCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API