State v. Stephens

40 P.3d 551, 179 Or. App. 544, 2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 191
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedFebruary 13, 2002
Docket99C-41789; A109562
StatusPublished

This text of 40 P.3d 551 (State v. Stephens) 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. Stephens, 40 P.3d 551, 179 Or. App. 544, 2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 191 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants, arguing that evidence of a urine test was inadmissible because the test did not conform to the applicable protocol. See ORS 813.131(4) (1997). The state confesses error, and we agree. State v. Chipman, 176 Or App 284, 31 P3d 478 (2001).

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

State v. Chipman
31 P.3d 478 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
40 P.3d 551, 179 Or. App. 544, 2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-stephens-orctapp-2002.