Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Hall

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 31, 2002No. 9701546CR; A109813Published

1DissentDeits, C. J.

I agree with the majority that the officer unlawfully stopped defendant without reasonable suspicion. The majority goes on, however, to conclude that the evidence obtained by the police during the stop must be suppressed because the police exploited that illegality to obtain the evidence. For the reasons that I will explain, I do not believe that the majority correctly defines or applies the concept of “exploitation.” The majority essentially uses the concept of exploitation as articulated in State v. Stanley, 139 Or App 526, 912 P2d 948 (1996) , rev’d on other grounds 325 Or 239, 935 P2d…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. State v. KennedyOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State v. QuinnOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  3. State v. RodriguezOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  4. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  5. State v. KostaOregon Supreme Court · 1987

20 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