State v. Griffin

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Griffin

172 P.3d 284, 216 Or. App. 322, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 1671

Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided November 28, 2007·No. CFH030113; A127751·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his conviction for possession of .a controlled substance, former ORS 475.992 (2003), arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found in a backpack, and further arguing that the court erred in admitting into evidence a laboratory report pursuant to ORS 475.235. We reject without discussion defendant’s arguments concerning the denial of his motion to suppress. Concerning the admission of the lab report into evidence, the state concedes that defendant is entitled to a reversal in light of the holding of State v. Birchfield, 342 Or 624, 157 P3d 216 (2007). We agree and accept the state’s concession.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his conviction for possession of .a controlled substance, former ORS 475.992 (2003), arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found in a backpack, and further arguing that the court erred in admitting into evidence a laboratory report pursuant to ORS 475.235. We reject without discussion defendant’s arguments concerning the denial of his motion to suppress. Concerning the admission of the lab report into evidence, the state concedes that defendant is entitled to a reversal in light of the holding of State v. Birchfield, 342 Or 624, 157 P3d 216 (2007). We agree and accept the state’s concession.

Reversed and remanded.

State v. Griffin, 172 P.3d 284, 216 Or. App. 322, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 1671 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

172 P.3d 284 (State v. Griffin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related