State v. Moser

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Moser

193 P.3d 1054, 222 Or. App. 519, 2008 Ore. App. LEXIS 1327

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedOctober 1, 2008

Docket040834208; A134916

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 193 P.3d 1054 (State v. Moser) 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. Moser, 193 P.3d 1054, 222 Or. App. 519, 2008 Ore. App. LEXIS 1327 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals a conviction for possession of a Schedule II controlled substance. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence that was seized after he consented to a search of his coin pocket, because that consent derived from the exploitation of an unlawful stop, in violation of his rights under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. The state concedes that defendant was unlawfully stopped and that his consent was the unattenuated product of the exploitation of that stop. We agree and accept the concession. State v. Rider, 216 Or App 308, 172 P3d 274 (2007), rev allowed, 345 Or 94 (2008).

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals a conviction for possession of a Schedule II controlled substance. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence that was seized after he consented to a search of his coin pocket, because that consent derived from the exploitation of an unlawful stop, in violation of his rights under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution. The state concedes that defendant was unlawfully stopped and that his consent was the unattenuated product of the exploitation of that stop. We agree and accept the concession. State v. Rider, 216 Or App 308, 172 P3d 274 (2007), rev allowed, 345 Or 94 (2008).

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 P.3d 1054, 222 Or. App. 519, 2008 Ore. App. LEXIS 1327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-moser-orctapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack