State v. Bennett

150 P.3d 1071, 210 Or. App. 462, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 13
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedJanuary 3, 2007
Docket02CR1918FE, 04CR0070FE; A127181, A127182
StatusPublished

This text of 150 P.3d 1071 (State v. Bennett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Bennett, 150 P.3d 1071, 210 Or. App. 462, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 13 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for possession of a Schedule II controlled substance, former ORS 475.992 (2003), renumbered as ORS 475.840 (2005).1 She assigns error to the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress evidence of a syringe of methamphetamine found in her backpack as part of an inventory search. The state concedes that the relevant inventory policy does not meet the requirements of Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution, for an administrative search. See, e.g., State v. Atkinson, 298 Or 1, 688 P2d 832 (1984); State v. Keller, 265 Or 622, 510 P2d 568 (1973). We agree and accept the state’s concession.

Judgment in Case No. A127181 reversed and remanded; judgment in Case No. A127182 affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Keller
510 P.2d 568 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1973)
State v. Atkinson
688 P.2d 832 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 P.3d 1071, 210 Or. App. 462, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bennett-orctapp-2007.