Oregon Supreme Court· 7/8/1981

State v. Holt

Citations

630 P.2d 854
291 Or. 343
1981 Ore. LEXIS 920

How courts have described this case

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

applying Katz’s “reasonable expectation of privacy” test in concluding that a police officer’s observation of the defendant masturbating in a doorless toilet stall in a public restroom was not a “search” under Article I, sec- tion 9
applying Katz’s “reasonable expectation of privacy” test in concluding that a police officer’s observation of the defendant masturbating in a doorless toilet stall in a public restroom was not a “search” under Article I, sec- tion 9
because the defendant had no actual or subjective expectation of privacy from observation, police observations were not a search
because the defendant had no actual or subjective expectation of privacy from observation, police observations were not a search
“The purpose of exclusion is to deter unlawful police conduct by excluding evidence unlawfully obtained from the person against whom it is to be used.”
“The purpose of exclusion is to deter unlawful police conduct by excluding evidence unlawfully obtained from the person against whom it is to be used.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Denecke, Tongue, Lent, Linde, Peterson, Tanzer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.