Legal Opinion

State v. Hauskins

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 5, 2012No. 096364; A144002PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, P. J.

While on probation for possession of controlled substances, defendant produced a urine sample that tested positive for drugs. When his probation officer told him the test results, defendant stated, “Yes. I used.” On the basis of that confession, the court found defendant in contempt of court under ORS 33.0651 and ORS 33.105(2)2 for violating a condition of his probation, and it imposed a punitive contempt sanction of 180 days in jail.3 On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal; in particular, he maintains that his confession was not…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Brown v. Multnomah County District CourtOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Brumnett v. Psychiatric Security Review BoardOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  4. State v. LerchOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Yancy v. ShatzerOregon Supreme Court · 2004

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. State v. MurgaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
  2. Fernando Diaz-Quirazco v. William BarrCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
  3. Department of Human Services v. B. A.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  4. State v. StroudCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
  5. State v. LangfordCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013

14 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