State v. Edgell

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the driver of a car did not have actual authority to consent to a search of the passenger’s personal items
• holding that the authority to consent to a search of a vehicle does not automatically per- mit a search of personal effects within that car
• “[The owner’s] actual authority to consent to a search of the car did not give her actual authority to consent to a search of [the] defendant or her belongings.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Fuller
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1999-02-17· cited 17×
• State v. Doyle
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2003-02-19· cited 8×
• State v. Bonilla
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-12-03· cited 6×
• State v. Pilgrim
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-03-09· cited 6×
• State v. Jones
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-08-03· cited 5×
• State v. Brown
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2002-08-28· cited 1×
• State v. Solorio
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2020-06-17