Skip to main content

State v. Alarcon

Citations

  • 259 Or. App. 462
  • 314 P.3d 364
  • 2013 WL 6095082
  • 2013 Ore. App. LEXIS 1370

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that, under the totality of the circumstances, an officer would have reasonably understood that the defendant’s query about “when she could call a lawyer” was an invocation of her right to counsel
  • “[M]erely informing [the defendant] of the same rights that she had been aware of before her query regarding an attorney was not sufficient to clarify her intent.”
  • “As part of that consideration, we assess any differences between the quality of the erroneously admitted evidence and other evidence admitted on the same issue.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.)
  • the defendant asked “when she could call a lawyer”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haselton, Ortega, Sercombe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.