Court of Appeals of Oregon· 8/17/2016

State v. Keller

Citations

280 Or. App. 249
380 P.3d 1144
2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 1001

How courts have described this case

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

noting that “unlawful drug possession may be established through proof of either actual or constructive possession” (citation omitted)
explaining that in Sherman, evidence suggesting that two individuals were engaged “in a joint drug-dealing enterprise” supported an inference that one individual constructively possessed drugs found on another (internal quotation marks omitted)
holding that a police officer did not have probable cause to believe that the defendant constructively possessed heroin where the defen- dant had been sitting in the driver’s seat of a parked car but the plastic baggie containing residue was located out of his line of sight
declining, for the same reason, to consider state’s “lack of exploitation” alternative basis for affirmance raised for first time on appeal
absence of facts indicating that defen- dant was in actual or constructive possession of heroin, an essential element of possession charge, precluded finding of objective probable cause to arrest for that offense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Allen, Armstrong, Hadlock, Tempore

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

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.