Legal Opinion

State v. Shelton

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 25, 1989No. 87-2550-C-2; CA A47118PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant was charged with possession of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992(4). The state appeals a pretrial order suppressing evidence, contending that the seizure was valid under either the “plain view” or the “emergency” exception to the warrant requirement. In granting defendant’s motion, the trial court stated only:

“It’s close. The balance is an extremely close situation, but I think it’s the Court’s responsibility to resolve close calls in favor of the defendants, so I will suppress the evidence.”

That order is not sufficient for effective review, because it lacks any finding of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. WiseOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State v. RaygozaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. SheltonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  2. State v. SheltonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API