State v. Burr
| Decision Date | 21 November 1995 |
| Parties | State v. Noah Burr; State v. Christopher Michael Alvarez; State v. Matthew Fries; State v. Matthew Allen Van Bergen NOS. A83869, A83870, A83871, A83872, S42619 |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
136 Or.App. 140, 901 P.2d 873. Durham, J., would allow.
DENIED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
19 cases
-
State v. Kruchek
....... The automobile exception provides that, " 'if police have probable cause to believe that a person's automobile, which is mobile when stopped by police, contains contraband or crime evidence' they may conduct a warrantless search for those items." State v. Burr, 136 Or.App. 140, 145, 901 P.2d 873, rev. den. 322 Or. 360, 907 P.2d 247 (1995) (quoting State v. Brown, 301 Or. 268, 276, 721 P.2d 1357 (1986)). The exception exists to prevent evidence of criminal activity from being moved quickly out of the locality in which the warrant must be sought. Burr, ......
- State v. Sunderman
-
State v. McCarthy
...problems when the police developed probable cause to search it. Later, in State v. Burr, 136 Or.App. 140, 150, 901 P.2d 873, rev den, 322 Or. 360 (1995), the court held that a pickup truck was mobile, even though officers had never seen it move and no one was in it, because it was "parked a......
-
State v. McCarthy
......Warner, 117 Or.App. 420, 424, 844. P 2d 272 (1992), the court held that a vehicle was not. mobile, even though an officer had seen it moving, because it. appeared to be having mechanical problems when the police. developed probable cause to search it. . . Later, in State v. Burr, 136 Or.App. 140, 150, 901. P.2d 873, rev den, 322 Or. 360 (1995), the court. held that a pickup truck was mobile, even though officers had. never seen it move and no one was in it, because it was. "parked along a public highway at night in an isolated. area" and four persons were ......
Request a trial to view additional results