State v. Buss

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Buss

821 P.2d 441, 110 Or. App. 302, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 1885

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedDecember 11, 1991

DocketC891390CR; CA A67867

StatusPublished

This text of 821 P.2d 441 (State v. Buss) 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. Buss, 821 P.2d 441, 110 Or. App. 302, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 1885 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his convictions for manufacturing, delivery and possession of controlled substances. ORS 475.992; ORS 163.575. The evidence was obtained in a search of the premises where defendant was staying. He contends that the court erred in denying his motion to controvert a search warrant affidavit and his motion to suppress the evidence seized.

Several police officers arrived with a search warrant at the residence where defendant was. Before they began any search, they obtained the consent of Muth, who owned and resided on the premises. At oral argument, defendant’s counsel agreed that, if the consent to search was valid, the validity of the search warrant need not be addressed.

The trial court made findings that defendant does not contest and concluded that Muth’s consent was voluntary. We agree with that conclusion.

Affirmed.

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