Oregon Supreme Court· 3/6/1990

State v. Coffey

Citations

788 P.2d 424
309 Or. 342
1990 Ore. LEXIS 26

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the “defendant may contest only the good faith, accuracy, and truthfulness of the affiant — and not that of the informant” under ORS 133.693, citing State v. Hitt, supra (emphasis in original)
recognizing that an officer reasonably could credit an unnamed informant because, among other things, the informant had reported that the cocaine was packaged in a manner known by the officer to be frequently used in the sale of cocaine
reliability established by officer confirmation of name and address of the defendant; informant’s description of packaging of cocaine and its slang name; and positive polygraph test results
reliability established by officer confirmation of name and address of the defendant; informant's description of packaging of cocaine and its slang name; and positive polygraph test results
requiring a showing in affidavit of reliability of confidential informant
requiring a showing in affidavit of reliability of confidential informant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Peterson, Linde, Carson, Jones, Gillette, Van Hoomissen Fadeley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

13 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.