State v. Thompson
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, P. J.
After the trial court denied defendant’s motion to suppress evidence — drugs that a police officer found in defendant’s purse and incriminating statements that she made thereafter — defendant was convicted of possession of methamphetamine. ORS 475.894. On appeal, she argues that, although she consented to the search that led to the discovery of the drugs and the subsequent statements, the consent occurred during an unlawful stop. The state maintains that the consent occurred during an encounter that was not a stop, but mere conversation and, for that reason, the encounter did not violate…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. HolmesOregon Supreme Court · 1991
- State v. AshbaughOregon Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. PainterOregon Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. RadtkeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
- State v. DierksCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013