State v. Kruse

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the state failed to prove that exigent circumstances existed, where the state’s only evidence concerning the time necessary to obtain a warrant was that it would have been “very lengthy” and the officer did not know the “exact time”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Tamisha Pearson v. City Of Seattle
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2016-02-29· cited 35×
• State v. MacHuca
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-09-30· cited 29×
• State v. Hinshaw
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2009-04-16· cited 13×
• State v. Sullivan
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-08-20· cited 11×
• State v. Ritz
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-03-25· cited 9×
• State v. Martinez-Alvarez
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2011-09-08· cited 7×
• State v. Rice
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-03-25· cited 4×
• State v. Gerety
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-06-14· cited 2×
• State v. Brown
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-08-13

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Kennedy
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 519×
• State v. Stevens
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1991-02-07· cited 332×
• State v. Bridewell
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1988-07-26· cited 131×
• State v. Nagel
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1994-09-09· cited 119×
• State v. Bea
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1993-12-30· cited 57×
• State v. Roberts
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1985-09-18· cited 25×
• State v. Enakiev
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-08-08· cited 18×