opportunity to rebut presumption (Oregon) · Go Syfert
← Oregon issues

opportunity to rebut presumption in Oregon

6 Oregon opinions name it 2 courts 2023–2024 6 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.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Turay green
or · 2023
2 sentences

2024In other words, once the minimum factual nexus is established, “there is a presumption that the challenged evi- dence must be suppressed, but the state has the opportunity to rebut that presumption.” Turay, 371 Or at 164 .

2024In other words, once the minimum factual nexus is established, “there is a presumption that the challenged evi- dence must be suppressed, but the state has the opportunity to rebut that presumption.” Turay, 371 Or at 164 .

52024–2024
State v. Johnson green
or · 2003
2 sentences

2024Restated, “when the defendant establishes a minimal factual nexus between a constitu- tional violation and challenged evidence that was obtained pursuant to a warranted search, there is a presumption that the challenged evidence must be suppressed, but the state has the opportunity to rebut that presumption.” Id. (citing Johnson I, 335 Or at 520 ).

2024Restated, “when the defendant establishes a minimal factual nexus between a constitu- tional violation and challenged evidence that was obtained pursuant to a warranted search, there is a presumption that the challenged evidence must be suppressed, but the state has the opportunity to rebut that presumption.” Id. (citing Johnson I, 335 Or at 520 ).

32023–2024
State v. DeJong green
or · 2021
2 sentences

2024Restated, “when the defendant establishes a minimal factual nexus between a constitu- tional violation and challenged evidence that was obtained pursuant to a warranted search, there is a presumption that the challenged evidence must be suppressed, but the state has the opportunity to rebut that presumption.” Id. (citing Johnson I, 335 Or at 520 ).

2024Restated, “when the defendant establishes a minimal factual nexus between a constitu- tional violation and challenged evidence that was obtained pursuant to a warranted search, there is a presumption that the challenged evidence must be suppressed, but the state has the opportunity to rebut that presumption.” Id. (citing Johnson I, 335 Or at 520 ).

22024–2024

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.670 (5) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.411 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.575 (3) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 167.017 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

PA 39 (1920–2026) NY 17 (1976–2019) IL 13 (1991–2024) OH 10 (1995–2025) TX 7 (1977–2007) CO 7 (1996–2025) FL 7 (1982–1999) CA 6 (1984–2024) OR 6 (2023–2024) TN 5 (2006–2017) MI 4 (1998–2023) WA 4 (1993–2017) NH 4 (1993–2025) NJ 4 (1987–2016) MD 3 (1967–2022) MN 3 (1992–2017) MS 3 (2005–2015) AL 3 (1984–2016) CT 3 (1984–1995) AK 2 (2012–2025) HI 2 (1980–1984) MO 2 (1972–2010) ND 2 (2019–2019) OK 2 (2008–2008) IN 2 (1973–2003) ID 2 (1986–2022) AZ 2 (1974–2021)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check