State v. Hyatt
This text of 249 P.3d 157 (State v. Hyatt) 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.
Opinion
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Travis Raymond HYATT, Defendant-Appellant.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Deputy Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Joanna L. *158 Jenkins, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before SCHUMAN, Presiding Judge, and WOLLHEIM, Judge, and NAKAMOTO, Judge.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant appeals a conviction for driving while under the influence of intoxicants. ORS 813.010. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence of his breath test, which an officer administered before defendant had a chance to seek advice from counsel. The state concedes that the officer did not provide defendant a reasonable opportunity to obtain legal advice before submitting to the test and that the trial court should have suppressed the evidence. We agree with and accept the state's concession. State v. Spencer, 305 Or. 59, 74-75, 750 P.2d 147 (1988); State v. Ashley, 137 Or.App. 561, 565-67, 907 P.2d 1120 (1995).
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
249 P.3d 157, 241 Or. App. 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hyatt-orctapp-2011.