OSC Grants Review on Two Significant EP Cases
by: Ryan • April 7, 2011 • no comments
The press release on the grant of review is here.
An earlier and important discussion following the issuance of the COA opinion in St v. Davis can be found here.
These cases involve the Equal Privileges clause of the Oregon Constitution and the random accessing of personal information. If you've got an embezzlement case, or any case involving the aggregation of thefts into fewer but bigger thefts, a related Equal Privileges case is discussed here and here .
The questions presented in St v. Davis are as follows:
(1) Does running a motorist's license plate and accessing personal information in his or her DMV record constitute a constitutionally significant burden under Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution?
(2) Assuming no other circumstances are present, is an officer's decision to run the license plate of a random motorist a haphazard, ad hoc act under Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution?
(3) Does Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution require consistent administration of all constitutionally significant benefits and burdens that are generally administered by state actors (e.g., a sheriff's initiation of a criminal investigation pursuant to her general authority), or does Article I, section 20, only require consistency of a state actor's application of benefits and burdens when they are specifically created and allocated to that actor for administration by law (e.g., a sheriff's grant or denial of a concealed gun license as directed by ORS 166.291 et seq.)?
