State v. Roth

How courts have described this case

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

• “[I]n Miller, the Supreme Court held that a defendant’s motion to suppress gives sufficient notice of the necessary facts underlying the motion by alleging only that the search at issue was ‘without a warrant.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Oxford
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-08-30· cited 4×
• State v. Jacinto-Leiva
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-08-30· cited 1×

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Wyatt
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2000-12-01· cited 659×
• State v. Brown
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1990-09-20· cited 504×
• Peeples v. Lampert
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2008-08-14· cited 389×
• State v. Hitz
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1988-12-20· cited 253×
• McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1998-06-11· cited 121×
• McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1998-04-23· cited 77×
• State v. Stevens
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1998-12-17· cited 60×
• State v. Miller
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1974-08-01· cited 44×
• State v. Sargent
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1996-06-27· cited 40×
• State v. Hammond
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2008-03-19· cited 29×
• State v. Steen
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2009-04-16· cited 19×
• State v. Gutierrez
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2000-09-27· cited 9×
• State v. Sweet
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1993-08-25· cited 8×
• State v. Smith
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2003-07-09· cited 2×