State v. Nichols

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that in determining whether an officer had reasonable sus- picion, we do not “pick[ ] apart each of the identified facts” Cite as 339 Or App 120 (2025
• rejecting defendant's attempts to pick apart and provide an innocent explanation for each individual fact

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Clink
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-04-29· cited 9×
• State v. McHaffie
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-05-28· cited 6×
• State v. Dendy
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-10-24
• State v. Hlebechuk
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2025-03-19

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Holdorf
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2014-08-07· cited 75×
• State v. McNeely
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2000-08-03· cited 30×
• State v. Maciel
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2013-01-16· cited 25×
• State v. Alvarado
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2013-07-24· cited 21×
• State v. Martin
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-01-02· cited 18×
• McNeely v. Oregon
  Supreme Court· 2000-12-11· cited 17×
• State v. Kentopp
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2012-08-08· cited 15×
• State v. Villemeyer
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-04-01· cited 6×
• State v. Bertha
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2013-04-24· cited 3×