State v. Barraza

How courts have described this case

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

• “Although the presence Cite as 315 Or App 787 (2021) 797 of an innocent explanation does not necessarily dispel prob- able cause, the incriminating explanation must be the more likely one when all of the facts are considered.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. James
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-10-29· cited 19×
• State v. Madden
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-11-24· cited 4×
• State v. McHenry
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-07-01· cited 1×
• State v. Edmiston
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-07-01

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Stevens
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1991-02-07· cited 332×
• State v. Will
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1994-11-23· cited 31×
• State v. Milks
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1994-04-20· cited 15×
• State v. McBride
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1989-04-26· cited 14×
• State v. Williams
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-11-14· cited 13×
• State v. Rodriguez-Ganegar
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2003-02-19· cited 11×
• State v. Guynn
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1999-09-15· cited 2×