Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

State v. Highley

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 21, 2013No. CC CR050560; CA A130716; SC S056079Published

1Concurring in the judgmentBrewer, J.

The majority holds that no part of Officer Desmond’s interaction with defendant amounted to a seizure — not his request for identification, not his initial request that defendant submit to a search, and not his persistence in the face of defendant’s obvious reluctance to reveal the contents of containers in his pockets — and that, in consequence, the question of reasonableness does not arise. My analysis of the interaction is different. First, for the reasons explained in my concurrence today in State v. Backstrand, 354 Or 392, 432 313 P3d 1084 (2013), I would conclude that Desmond seized…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Brendlin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Arizona v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  4. People v. HollmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  5. State v. EhlyOregon Supreme Court · 1993

12 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