It looks like the Oregon Supreme Court decided to erode more of the 4th Amendment, but hey, who's counting anyway.....Rob T....
A divided Oregon Supreme Court handed down a decision on police searches that satisfies no one, but appears to give more leeway to police.
At issue was a 2005 decision, also by a divided court, that bars use of incriminating evidence that police obtain after making
an unlawful stop — but the defendant consents to the search that turns up the evidence.
The court majority decided that it depends on the circumstances, and whether the defendant’s consent was truly voluntary
If you drive by police and an officer is running a license-plate check on your car — without you being aware of it — the Oregon Supreme Court has decided that’s OK.
But the public will never know why the court decided that way, because the justices split in an unusual 3-3 tie earlier this month.
So by default, the court upheld a 2010 Court of Appeals decision that the practice does not violate state constitutional guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Because Judge Jack Landau voted in that 2010 decision, handed down three months before he joined the high court, he could not
take part in its review by the Supreme Court the following year.
SCOTUS refuses to hear “piracy” arguments
SCOTUS declines death penalty case
SCOTUS revives challenge to ObamaCare & rejects appeal of congressman
SCOTUS denies Ohio request to curtail early voting
Landowner stands ground against government ‘shake-down’
Pacific Legal Foundation & the Sacketts win in the Supreme Court....
Is the EPA superagency bigger than the President & Congress?
Preserve the Waters of the US Act
Subject: CWA meeting recap and information
House Committee: EPA Overstepped Its Authority