State v. Weeks

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Weeks

40 P.3d 574, 179 Or. App. 548, 2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 189

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedFebruary 13, 2002

Docket9904104CR; A107908

StatusPublished

This text of 40 P.3d 574 (State v. Weeks) 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. Weeks, 40 P.3d 574, 179 Or. App. 548, 2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 189 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

The state appeals from a pretrial order excluding evidence of a urine test result and argues, that the result in this case is controlled by our holding in State v. Chipman, 176 Or App 284, 31 P3d 478 (2001). The parties to this case agreed to rely on the record made to the trial court in Chipman.

In Chipman and in this case, the trial court excluded evidence of drug test results, holding that the results were obtained in violation of ORS 813.131(4) (1997). In our opinion in Chipman, we acknowledged that the statute required urine testing to be performed in accordance with federal guidelines provided by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), but we also held that the pertinent NIDA guidelines apply only to marijuana, cocaine, opiates, phencyclidine, and amphetamines and the metabolites of those drugs. In this case, the results of defendant’s urine test are not part of the record. The trial court excluded the results in their entirety. For the same reasons cited in our opinion in Chipman, the exclusionary order was error, insofar as it may have excluded test results not governed by the NIDA guidelines.

Vacated and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM

The state appeals from a pretrial order excluding evidence of a urine test result and argues, that the result in this case is controlled by our holding in State v. Chipman, 176 Or App 284, 31 P3d 478 (2001). The parties to this case agreed to rely on the record made to the trial court in Chipman.

In Chipman and in this case, the trial court excluded evidence of drug test results, holding that the results were obtained in violation of ORS 813.131(4) (1997). In our opinion in Chipman, we acknowledged that the statute required urine testing to be performed in accordance with federal guidelines provided by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), but we also held that the pertinent NIDA guidelines apply only to marijuana, cocaine, opiates, phencyclidine, and amphetamines and the metabolites of those drugs. In this case, the results of defendant’s urine test are not part of the record. The trial court excluded the results in their entirety. For the same reasons cited in our opinion in Chipman, the exclusionary order was error, insofar as it may have excluded test results not governed by the NIDA guidelines.

Vacated and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 P.3d 574, 179 Or. App. 548, 2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-weeks-orctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack