State v. Love-Faust

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that compelling circumstances “exist when, viewing the totality of the circumstances, a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would feel compelled to answer an offi- cer’s questions”
• explaining that compelling circumstances “exist when, viewing the totality of the circumstances, a reason- able person in the defendant’s position would feel compelled to answer an officer’s questions”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Revette
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-04-06· cited 8×
• State v. Love-Faust
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-03-10· cited 7×
• State v. Tardie
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-04-20· cited 6×
• State v. Reed
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-02-09· cited 2×
• State v. Fleetwood
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2026-03-11· cited 1×

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Pereida-Alba v. Coursey
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2015-01-15· cited 82×
• State v. Love-Faust
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-03-10· cited 7×