Court of Appeals of Oregon· 4/14/1980

State v. Frame

Citations

609 P.2d 830
45 Or. App. 723
1980 Ore. App. LEXIS 2561

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 consent of a co-occupant with \common authority\ will justify a warrantless search despite the fact that the defendant did not object or consent to the search
holding that the consent of a co-occupant with “common authority” will justify a war-rantless search despite the fact that the defendant did not object or consent to the search
holding that the consent to search given by the defendant's wife and cohabitant was an effective consent because it was consistent with the rationale set forth in United States v. Matlock
holding that the consent to search given by the defendant’s wife and cohabitant was an effective consent because it was consistent with the rationale set forth in United States v. Matlock
noting that a consenting occupant can act in his own interest where he or she summons the police to seize stolen property kept in the premises because the consenting party could later be charged with possession of such items
noting that a consenting occupant can act in his own interest where he or she summons the police to seize stolen property kept in the premises because the consenting party could later be charged with possession of such items

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Tanzer, Thornton, Campbell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

16 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.