State v. Najar
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the Court
FLYNN, J. pro tempore
Defendant challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence that officers discovered after defendant consented to the inspection of a container that officers found during a “pat down” search. The trial court concluded that defendant was seized at the time of the search and that the seizure was authorized by officer safety concerns, rejecting defendant’s argument that he was seized much earlier during the encounter and that the state failed to prove any lawful basis for the earlier seizure. Defendant argues that he was seized when, during the course of…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Outdoor Media Dimensions Inc. v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. BatesOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- State v. AshbaughOregon Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. Maciel-FigueroaOregon Supreme Court · 2017
- State v. UngerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. Soto-NavarroCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
- State v. ProutyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
- State v. GabrCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
- State v. AlmesticaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
- State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022