Legal Opinion

State v. Bonilla

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 31, 2015No. CC 11CR2221FE; CA A153808; SC S062962PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*477BREWER, J.

Police officers entered a residence without a warrant and opened a wooden box that they found in a bedroom, believing that they had lawful consent to take each of those actions. Defendant, who was charged with unlawful possession of a controlled substance based on evidence found in the box, moved to suppress the evidence under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution, on the ground that the persons who had given consent to the home entry and the search of the box were not authorized to give consent. The trial court denied the motion to suppress. On appeal from her ensuing…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Brinegar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Illinois v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Maryland v. GarrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Hill v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. State v. BatesOregon Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. State v. BlairOregon Supreme Court · 2017
  2. State v. MerrillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  3. State v. BlissOregon Supreme Court · 2018
  4. State v. RitzOregon Supreme Court · 2017
  5. State v. VoylesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016

26 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