Oregon Court of Appeals 06-30-10
by: Abassos • June 29, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Felon in Possession - Knowledge that one is a Felon
- Patdown - Scope
- Miranda - Implied Consent Warning is not Interrogation
- Merger - Identity Theft
Contents |
=
Felon in Possession - Knowledge that one is a felon===
Knowledge of one's felonious status is an element of the crime of Felon in Possession of a Firearm. This case overturns State v. Van Norsdall. State v. Rainoldi
Patdown - Scope
Pulling up a person's pant leg exceeds the scope of a normal patdown. Intrusion into clothing requires probable cause. Defendant was present for a warrant search of her friend's house. As a routine part of securing the house, the officer did a patdown which involved lifting defendant's jeans to look inside her cowboy boots. A meth pipe was found. Suppressed. State v. Coffer
Miranda - Implied Consent Warning is not Interrogation
Defendant's statement that she refused to take the breath test because she feared she wouldn't pass should not have been suppressed. Miranda warnings weren't required because neither the breath test nor the implied consent warnings are interrogation. They're part of the normal arrest and booking procedures. State v. Gardner
Merger - Identity Theft
Multiple counts of ID theft for multiple forms of ID within a single stolen purse merge into a single count of ID theft. State v. Hathaway
