State v. Yaeger
Decision Date | 18 August 2021 |
Docket Number | A164641 |
Citation | 493 P.3d 579 (Mem),314 Or.App. 97 |
Court | Oregon Court of Appeals |
Parties | STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Jeffrey Christian YAEGER, Defendant-Appellant. |
Ernest Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Kali Montague, Senior Deputy Defender, for petition.
No response filed.
Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Shorr, Judge.
In State v. Yaeger , 311 Or. App. 626, 651, 492 P.3d 668 (2021), we addressed the admissibility of four search warrants after holding that post-prison supervision officers unlawfully interrogated defendant and that the discovery of defendant's cellphones was a product of the Miranda violation. We concluded that, because the third and fourth warrants depended on information from an SD card, which we had concluded was lawfully obtained, those warrants were valid. Defendant petitions for reconsideration, pointing out that it was an oversight on our part to conclude that the fourth warrant, which was to search phones that were obtained unlawfully as a result of Miranda violation, was valid. We agree. Regardless of the sufficiency of probable cause to search defendant's cellphones, a warrant cannot authorize the search of unlawfully obtained property. We therefore allow reconsideration of our opinion and modify the text of the penultimate paragraph to read as follows (emphasis indicates modified and added text):
"
Further, we modify the last sentence of the last paragraph to add the emphasized text:
"The third and fourth warrants were supported by probable cause, but the fourth warrant was not valid, because it sought to search defendant's unlawfully...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Yaeger
...P.3d 710 (2021). In our first opinion, State v. Yaeger , 311 Or App 626, 651, 492 P.3d 668, adh'd to as modified on recons. , 314 Or App 97, 493 P.3d 579 (2021), vac'd , 369 Or. 338, 504 P.3d 1178 (2022), we agreed with defendant that much of the evidence against her on charges of second-de......
- State v. Yaeger