Court of Appeals of Oregon· 5/29/2002

State v. Warner

Citations

47 P.3d 497
181 Or. App. 622
2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 840

How courts have described this case

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

compelling circumstances did not exist where the source of defendant’s inability to leave the emergency room during questioning was medical immobilization for injuries suffered by the defendant in a car accident
using ORS 813.160(1) “to be valid” language as an example of a foundational requirement
using ORS 813.160(1) “to be valid” language as an example of a foundational requirement
“ORS 813.160(2) does not—either on its face, or in its statutory context—provide for the exclusion of evidence obtained when its requirements are violated.”
“ORS 136.432 does not allow courts to suppress evidence whose sole taint is that it was obtained in violation of a statutory provision.”
“[W]e conclude that—despite the insufficient foundation in this case to show compliance with ORS 813.160(2)—the blood draw evidence is ‘otherwise admissible,’ and ORS 136.432 requires its admission.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Landau, Brewer, Osborne

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

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

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.