State v. Riegelmann

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Riegelmann

639 P.2d 1305, 55 Or. App. 822, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 2504

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedFebruary 2, 1982

DocketNo. C80-10-33535, CA A20182 (control), No. C80-11-33990, CA A20183

StatusPublished

This text of 639 P.2d 1305 (State v. Riegelmann) 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. Riegelmann, 639 P.2d 1305, 55 Or. App. 822, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 2504 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from a trial court order denying his motion to suppress evidence. He alleges error in the trial court’s denial of a right to present oral argument on the motion. That was not error. See State v. Gholston, 55 Or App 790, 639 P2d 1302 (1981). A second search was with defendant’s voluntary consent and it was not tainted by any preceding illegality. State v. Quinn, 290 Or 383, 623 P2d 630 (1981).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from a trial court order denying his motion to suppress evidence. He alleges error in the trial court’s denial of a right to present oral argument on the motion. That was not error. See State v. Gholston, 55 Or App 790, 639 P2d 1302 (1981). A second search was with defendant’s voluntary consent and it was not tainted by any preceding illegality. State v. Quinn, 290 Or 383, 623 P2d 630 (1981).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

639 P.2d 1305, 55 Or. App. 822, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 2504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-riegelmann-orctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack