Skip to main content

State v. Rambo

Citations

  • 250 Or. App. 186
  • 279 P.3d 361
  • 2012 WL 1950414
  • 2012 Ore. App. LEXIS 694

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that trial court did not err in admitting testimony that drew its force from training and experience rather than “the mantle of science”
  • holding that a DRE expert who completed 11 of the 12 DRE steps could testify that the defendant was under the influence of a narcotic analgesic
  • recognizing officer’s qualification to offer nonscientific expert opinion of intoxication based on training and experience
  • concluding that the officer “apart from his reference to independently admissible scientific tests — [did not] rely on the vocabulary of science, nor did he suggest that his conclusions had been reached through the application of a scientific method to collected data”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brewer, Ortega, Sercombe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.