Skip to main content

State v. Holcomb

Citations

  • 125 P.3d 22
  • 203 Or. App. 35
  • 2005 Ore. App. LEXIS 1561

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[TJaking a suspect’s identification and calling dispatch to conduct a warrant check constitutes a stop.”
  • obtaining the defendant’s identification and retaining it while conducting a warrant check effected a stop
  • rejecting the state’s argument that “a person’s recent drug use is sufficient, without more, to establish reasonable suspicion of present drug possession”
  • “this case does not present the issue whether, or in what circumstances, ‘mere obtaining’ of identification can effect a stop”
  • “track marks on defendant’s arm—indicating that she probably, almost certainly, used unlawful controlled substances” and evidence that defendant may have recently used drugs did not support reasonable inference that defendant currently possessed drugs
  • the facts that the officer observed track marks on the defendant’s arms, saw the defendant “dancing” on the shoulder of the highway, and discovered that she was on probation did not amount to reasonable suspicion of possession of a controlled substance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haselton, Armstrong, Rosenblum

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

3 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.