State v. Whitehead
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, J.
Defendant was charged with driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII). ORS 813.010. The state appeals a pretrial order suppressing statements made by defendant during the field sobriety tests. We reverse and remand.
At 1:40 a.m. on January 23, 1992, defendant was lawfully stopped by officer Zerzan. During that encounter, Zerzan reasonably suspected that defendant had committed the crime of DUII. Zerzan provided defendant with the warnings required by Oregon’s Implied Consent Law, ORS 813.135 1 and 813.136, 2 and gave “Miranda” warnings. He asked defendant how much he had had to drink…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Pennsylvania v. MunizSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- State v. CaraherOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. IsomOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. MedenbachCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
- State v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. LarsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- State v. DillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- State v. DillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- State v. DillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.