Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Baron

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 24, 1979No. C-78-09-14577, CA 12863Published

1DissentButtler, J.

Because I think the trial court properly held that the warrantless search of defendant’s clothing was without probable cause, I dissent.

Unless we are prepared to hold that there is probable cause to search any person present at the time a valid warrant to search for drugs is being executed, the majority opinion is wrong. We have never so held, and, in fact, have held to the contrary where there were facts lending substantially more support to a finding of probable cause for a search than exists here. In State v. Ford, 20 Or App 384, 531 P2d 740 (1975), the defendant showed up at premises *279where…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. State v. ElkinsOregon Supreme Court · 1966
  3. State v. ChinnOregon Supreme Court · 1962
  4. State v. KrognessOregon Supreme Court · 1963
  5. State v. GrodaOregon Supreme Court · 1979

2 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