State v. Roberts

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that officers in hot pursuit need not obtain a warrant before searching a car that the defendant left behind as he fled on foot
• holding that officers in hot pursuit need not obtain a warrant before searching a car that the defendant left behind as he fled on foot
• holding alternatively that officers in hot pursuit need not obtain warrant before searching car that defendant left behind as he fled on foot
• “[I]t is preposterous to assert that a police officer in hot pursuit * * * must stop as soon as the pursued drives upon private property * * * and get a search warrant in order to apprehend the [suspect].”
• “[I]t is preposterous to assert that a police officer in hot pursuit * * * must stop as soon as the pursued drives upon private property * * * and get a search warrant in order to apprehend the [suspect].”
• upholding warrantless search in similar situation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Snow
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2004-07-29· cited 35×
• State v. Drummond
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1971-10-19· cited 26×
• State v. Oland
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1969-11-14· cited 24×
• State v. Fessenden / Dicke
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2014-08-07· cited 22×
• State v. Ayers
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1974-01-28· cited 14×
• State v. Romero
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1969-11-14· cited 12×
• State v. Iams
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-12-18· cited 4×
• Earl Leslie Roberts v. H. C. Cupp
  Ninth Circuit· 1970-08-12
• Roberts v. Gladden
  D. Oregon· 1968-11-13

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Anders v. California
  Supreme Court· 1967-05-08· cited 87,848×
• State v. Roberts
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1966-11-23· cited 4×