State v. Edwards

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, despite error in address, warrant lawfully authorized a search of the defendant’s property because of the accurate description of the property and accompanying directions to it
• Newark Morning Ledger did not attempt, in this case, to claim a separate depreciation allowance for the subscriber lists it acquired
• where warrant included incorrect street address of property to be searched, but contained a detailed description “which corresponded to only one premises in the world,” warrant was valid
• treating the statutory and constitutional particularity requirements as coextensive
• treating the statutory and constitutional particularity requirements as coextensive

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Newark Morning Ledger Co. v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1993-04-20· cited 142×
• State v. Carter
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2005-06-15· cited 10×
• State v. Trax
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2002-01-30· cited 4×
• State v. KADIN
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-02-07· cited 2×
• State v. Kauppi
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-04-13· cited 1×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Steele v. United States No. 1
  Supreme Court· 1925-04-13· cited 727×
• State v. Blackburn
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1973-06-21· cited 61×
• State v. Moylett
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1992-07-16· cited 59×
• State v. Ingram
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1992-04-23· cited 34×
• State v. Davis
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1991-04-10· cited 14×
• State v. Burton
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1993-07-07· cited 1×