State v. Ford

How courts have described this case

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

• by “persistently pressur[ing] defendant for more information in ways that assumed defendant’s guilt,” an officer contributed to making the circumstances of an interrogation compelling
• An “officer’s repeated commands to divulge more information”—occur- ring five or six times—coupled with the officer’s implications of guilt gave the interview “coercive overtones.”
• An “offi- cer’s repeated commands to divulge more information”— occurring five or six times—coupled with the officer’s impli- cations of guilt gave the interview “coercive overtones.”
• one factor contributing to a finding of compel- ling circumstances was that, “although the duration of the encounter—one hour—does not, by itself, suggest that the circumstances were compelling, defendant was subjected to the cold weather during most of that time”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Reynolds
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2012-06-20· cited 63×
• State v. Grimm
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-02-14· cited 17×
• State v. Phillips
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2020-03-04· cited 9×
• State v. Mattheisen
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-09-16· cited 7×
• State v. Nolen
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-06-26· cited 3×
• State v. Andrews
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-09-18

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

• State v. Ford
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2011-07-13· cited 7×