State v. Ainsworth
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCarson, J.
The issue in this case is whether purposive aerial observation by police constitutes an “unreasonable search” under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. We conclude that a purposive aerial observation is not, simply by virtue of either of these characteristics, a search for constitutional purposes. Because we determine that defendants’ constitutional rights were not violated in this case, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals and affirm the trial court’s judgments of conviction.
FACTS
Defendants, husband and wife, live on approximately 14 acres of rural property in…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Horton v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- California v. CiraoloSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
- State v. OwensOregon Supreme Court · 1986
- Dow Chemical Co. v. United States Ex Rel. AdministratorSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by83 opinions
- State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. JuliusWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1991
- State v. Xiomara Gonzales(075911)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2016
- State v. NagelOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. WackerOregon Supreme Court · 1993
78 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.