Court of Appeals of Oregon· 3/11/1974
State v. Johnson
Citations
- 519 P.2d 1053
- 16 Or. App. 560
- 1974 Ore. App. LEXIS 1237
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- requiring that defendant must give State as much notice as possible of the contentions it must be prepared to meet at the suppression hearing
- requiring that defendant must give State as much notice as possible of the contentions it must be prepared to meet at the suppression hearing
- “given the absence of any findings in the court’s orders allowing the [suppression] motions, we are unable to begin the process of reviewing those decisions”
- “Courts throughout the country hold that they are not obligated to do ‘counsel's work for him or her.’”
- “motion to suppress should be as reasonably specific as.possible under the circumstances in order to give the state as much notice as possible of the contentions it must be prepared to meet at a suppression hearing”
- \motion to suppress should be as reasonably specific as possible under the circumstances in order to give the state as much notice as possible of the contentions it must be prepared to meet at a suppression hearing\
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Schwab, Fort, Tanzer
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
53 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- City of Xenia v. WallaceOhio Supreme Court· 1988-06-22· cited 509×
- State v. ShindlerOhio Supreme Court· 1994-08-10· cited 223×
- State v. MageeOregon Supreme Court· 1987-10-20· cited 87×
- State v. CarterUtah Supreme Court· 1985-09-27· cited 64×
- State v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1978-05-08· cited 62×
- State v. LeeUtah Supreme Court· 1981-06-30· cited 59×
- State v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Utah· 1990-04-18· cited 56×
- State v. AgeeWashington Supreme Court· 1977-12-29· cited 53×
- State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court· 1974-08-01· cited 44×
- People v. JansenSupreme Court of Colorado· 1986-01-31· cited 44×
- Southern v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2002-09-17· cited 36×
- State v. OsbornNebraska Supreme Court· 1996-05-10· cited 35×
- State v. WiseOregon Supreme Court· 1988-02-17· cited 33×
- State v. ShindlerOhio Supreme Court· 1994-08-09· cited 33×
- People v. RamirezAppellate Court of Illinois· 2013-10-04· cited 32×
- People v. DunmireAppellate Court of Illinois· 2021-01-21· cited 23×
- State v. PeaglerOhio Supreme Court· 1996-08-28· cited 22×
- State v. HackerCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1981-04-20· cited 18×
- State v. McIntyre/PereiraCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1993-10-06· cited 18×
- State v. ApodacaCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1987-04-22· cited 18×
Cites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court· 1968-07-17· cited 849×
- State v. ChinnOregon Supreme Court· 1962-06-27· cited 135×
- State v. SwainOregon Supreme Court· 1974-01-04· cited 76×
- City of Portland v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1972-04-07· cited 42×
- State v. WrightOregon Supreme Court· 1973-07-19· cited 18×
- State v. HaynesOregon Supreme Court· 1962-12-31· cited 13×
- State v. GwinnCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1973-02-12· cited 12×
- State v. RamonOregon Supreme Court· 1967-10-13· cited 9×
- Ames v. MOTOR VEHICLES DIV., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1974-01-21· cited 8×
- State v. LattaOregon Supreme Court· 1967-03-15· cited 8×
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.