Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Oregon opinions name it 2 courts 2014–2015 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oregon courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Brown v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2015However, after the trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress in this case, the Oregon Supreme Court disavowed its holding in Dempster , stating that “Dempster’s per se rule is inconsistent with the subsequent development of the Fourth Amendment attenuation exception set out in Brown v. Illinois, 422 US 590 , 95 S Ct 2254 , 45 L Ed 2d 416 (1975), where the United States Supreme Court rejected such an approach.” State v. Bailey, 356 Or 486, 488 , 338 P3d 702 (2014). 2015However, after the trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress in this case, the Oregon Supreme Court disavowed its holding in Dempster , stating that “Dempster’s per se rule is inconsistent with the subsequent development of the Fourth Amendment attenuation exception set out in Brown v. Illinois, 422 US 590 , 95 S Ct 2254 , 45 L Ed 2d 416 (1975), where the United States Supreme Court rejected such an approach.” State v. Bailey, 356 Or 486, 488 , 338 P3d 702 (2014). | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Bailey
green
2 sentences2015However, after the trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress in this case, the Oregon Supreme Court disavowed its holding in Dempster , stating that “Dempster’s per se rule is inconsistent with the subsequent development of the Fourth Amendment attenuation exception set out in Brown v. Illinois, 422 US 590 , 95 S Ct 2254 , 45 L Ed 2d 416 (1975), where the United States Supreme Court rejected such an approach.” State v. Bailey, 356 Or 486, 488 , 338 P3d 702 (2014). 2015However, after the trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress in this case, the Oregon Supreme Court disavowed its holding in Dempster , stating that “Dempster’s per se rule is inconsistent with the subsequent development of the Fourth Amendment attenuation exception set out in Brown v. Illinois, 422 US 590 , 95 S Ct 2254 , 45 L Ed 2d 416 (1975), where the United States Supreme Court rejected such an approach.” State v. Bailey, 356 Or 486, 488 , 338 P3d 702 (2014). | 2 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Mitchell
green
2 sentences2015State v. Mitchell, 273 Or App 207 , 215 n 3, 360 P3d 525 (2015) (concluding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress under the Fourth Amendment attenuation test set forth in Bailey, and recognizing that the result under Article I, section 9, “would almost certainly” be the same). 2015State v. Mitchell, 273 Or App 207 , 215 n 3, 360 P3d 525 (2015) (concluding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress under the Fourth Amendment attenuation test set forth in Bailey, and recognizing that the result under Article I, section 9, “would almost certainly” be the same). | 1 | 2015–2015 |