State v. Rider

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that defendant was stopped when officer wrote down identifying information and instructed another officer to run a warrant check
• concluding that the defendant’s consent was the unattenuated product of the unlawful stop because the state advanced no argument that some fact or circumstance severed the causal connection between the stop and the defendant’s consent
• concluding that the defendant’s consent was the unattenuated product of the unlawful stop because the state advanced no argument that some fact or circumstance severed the causal connection between the stop and the defendant’s consent
• the encounter escalated into a stop when the defendant heard the officer order a warrants check
• officer’s request to another officer to run a warrant check on the defendant in the defendant’s presence constituted a stop even without the officer requesting or retaining the defendant’s physical identification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Parker
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-02-11· cited 12×
• State v. Hemenway
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-12-09· cited 7×
• State v. Chambers
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-03-04· cited 7×
• State v. Cohan
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-04-01· cited 3×
• State v. Maxie
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2010-04-21· cited 1×
• State v. Norton
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-04-22· cited 1×
• State v. Maciel-Figueroa
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-08-26· cited 1×