Today's Oregon Supreme Court Ruling - Preservation and Burden
by: James Aaron • July 27, 2011 • no comments
The Supreme Court today reasserted that the bar for preservation of issues for appeal must not be set too high. Rather, an issue is preserved as long as the "party provides sufficient information to enable opposing parties to meet an objection and the trial court to avoid error." The defendant need not adduce particular authorities to support her argument, reiterate an argument already made in writing, take issue with the judge's failure to address the argument, or even differentiate between the proper analysis under the federal and state constitutions.
On the merits, the court holds that when a search is conducted pursuant to a warrant, the burden of proof lies on the defendant to show that the search or seizure was unreasonable, even when the defendant's argument is that the search exceeded the scope of the warrant. The parties argued about the proper test for when officers with a search warrant can search personal property owned by non-resident guests at the location. Since the record was silent on several key factual issues necessary to determine whether the search was proper under any of the proposed tests, the court punts the question and determines the defendant did not meet her burden of proof. State v. Walker.
