Oregon Supreme Court· 1/20/1981

State v. Quinn

Citations

290 Or. 383
623 P.2d 630
1981 Ore. LEXIS 678

How courts have described this case

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

stating exclusionary rule under Article I, section 9, should be applied only as broadly as necessary to accomplish its “prophylactic” purposes
declaring Oregon’s 1978 death penalty statute unconstitutional due, in part, to its failure to harmonize with the then existing criminal statutory scheme
declaring Oregon's 1978 death penalty statute unconstitutional due, in part, to its failure to harmonize with the then existing criminal statutory scheme
finding defendant’s consent was unaffected by prior illegal search because, as defendant was unaware of the illegal search, his consent was “uninfluenced and untainted by the earlier unlawful act”
finding defendant's consent was unaffected by prior illegal search because, as defendant was unaware of the illegal search, his consent was \uninfluenced and untainted by the earlier unlawful act\
referring to the “protective and prophylactic purposes” of the deterrence-based exclusionary rule

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Peterson, Tanzer, Tongue

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

117 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

76 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named State v. Quinn

132 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.