Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Carter

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 8, 1978No. C 76-10-14543, CA 7902; C 76-10-14544, CA 7903Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partThornton, J.

I agree with the majority that the stop was valid and that the trial judge erred in ruling to the contrary. Likewise, I am in full accord with the objective test rule announced in the majority opinion.

*34I do not, however, agree with the majority’s conclusion that the arresting officer’s (Officer Miller) actions after the stop were unreasonable. The majority opinion disregards the fact that while the trial judge found the stop invalid, he nevertheless concluded that Officer Miller’s actions after tine stop were not unreasonable. In addition, the judge stated:

"Some claim has been made that they…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania v. MimmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. State v. HickmannOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  3. State v. FloresOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. State v. DouglasOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  5. State v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976

3 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