Legal Opinion
State v. Young
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided July 24, 1991No. 88-1315 & 88-1316 CA A62227PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.
Defendants were charged with manufacture of a controlled substance, ORS 475.992(1), and possession of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992(4). Before trial they moved to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant, to controvert the affidavit submitted for the warrant and to have disclosed the name of an informant who gave information to the affiant. The court allowed the motion to suppress and the state appeals; defendants cross-appeal the denial of the motions to controvert and to disclose the informant. We reverse on the appeal and affirm on the cross-appeal.
The issue on the…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Aguilar v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Spinelli v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- United States v. VentrescaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- State v. FarrarOregon Supreme Court · 1990
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- State v. Pelster/BoyerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- State v. EvansCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
- State v. WorshamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- State v. ChaseCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
- State v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.