Case Reviews/Oregon Appellate Court - Nov. 6, 2013/c000032

Latest revision as of 09:55, November 9, 2013

This is an important case because it revives Dominguez-Martinez -- which was a statutory stop analysis -- and makes that excellent case part of Art I, sec 9, jurisprudence. Including, I'd argue, the idea that traffic stops are supposed to be the "minimal intrusions on Oregon drivers." http://scholar.google.com/scholar?scidkt=17576227234042551485+17061941553322129545+12596814160424449777&as_sdt=2&hl=en

Revision as of 09:47, November 9, 2013 (view source) Reo@oberlaw.com (Talk \| contribs) (New comment by Reoberdorfer: This is an important case because it revives Dominguez-Martinez -- which was a statutory stop analysis -- and makes that excellent case part of Art I, sec 9, jurisprudence. Inc...)		Latest revision as of 09:55, November 9, 2013 (view source) Reo@oberlaw.com (Talk \| contribs) m
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	This is an important case because it revives Dominguez-Martinez -- which was a statutory stop analysis -- and makes that excellent case part of Art I, sec 9, jurisprudence. Including, I'd argue, ~~some of my favorite words ever from~~ the ~~Court about~~ traffic stops: "The legislature intended * * * to ~~permit only~~ minimal intrusions on Oregon drivers ~~stopped for traffic infractions[~~.]" http://scholar.google.com/scholar?scidkt=17576227234042551485+17061941553322129545+12596814160424449777&as_sdt=2&hl=en	+	This is an important case because it revives Dominguez-Martinez -- which was a statutory stop analysis -- and makes that excellent case part of Art I, sec 9, jurisprudence. Including, I'd argue, the idea that traffic stops are supposed to be the "minimal intrusions on Oregon drivers." http://scholar.google.com/scholar?scidkt=17576227234042551485+17061941553322129545+12596814160424449777&as_sdt=2&hl=en