Legal Opinion

State v. Chilson

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 2, 2008No. 057202; A131682PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, P. J.

After the trial court denied defendant’s motion to suppress evidence, rejecting her argument that the evidence derived from an unlawful stop, she entered a conditional guilty plea to driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), ORS 813.010, reserving her right to appeal the denial of the motion. ORS 135.335(3). She renews her argument on appeal. In particular, she argues that, because it was impossible under the circumstances for her to comply with the statute that served as the basis of the stop, the statute could not be applied against her, and the stop was therefore unlawful. We…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. Vasquez-RubioOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  3. State v. BeaOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  4. State v. MatthewsOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State v. TiffinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Miller v. Columbia CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  2. State v. BoatrightCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. State v. VANLOMCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  4. State v. KellyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  5. State v. HinerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

1 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