State v. Olinger

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 police did not have implied consent to enter the offshoot of a driveway on the side of a house because the purpose was not to contact persons at the front door
• vacating trial court’s judgment and remanding for further proceedings after concluding that the trial court did not rule or make findings as to whether a defendant’s decision to consent to search was significantly affected by a preceding unlawful search of his car
• addressing police entry into an offshoot of a driveway and stating that, if the “entry onto that area of the curtilage was not pursuant to defendant’s implied consent, his intrusion was a trespass, and thus a search in violation of Article I, section 9
• addressing police entry into an offshoot of a driveway and stating that, if the “entry onto that area of the curtilage was not pursuant to defendant’s implied consent, his intrusion was a trespass, and thus a search in violation of Article I, section 9”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).