finding that an amount of marijuana consistent with personal use, plus materials consistent with delivery of a controlled substance, were sufficient to support a conviction of delivery where the defendant was also observed with a large group of people around him and admitted to having sold drugs to two people earlier that day
Summary of this case from State v. O'HareAugust 6, 2002
August 13, 2002
August 6, 2002
August 13, 2002
finding that an amount of marijuana consistent with personal use, plus materials consistent with delivery of a controlled substance, were sufficient to support a conviction of delivery where the defendant was also observed with a large group of people around him and admitted to having sold drugs to two people earlier that day
Summary of this case from State v. O'Hareconcluding that ORS 1.002 includes the implied administrative authority for the Chief Justice and presiding judges to regulate the security of courthouse facilities
Summary of this case from State v. McCarthydescribing the particularity inquiry as "whether any police officer executing the search warrant could ascertain with reasonable effort the identity of the place to be searched"
Summary of this case from State v. Breedwellsetting forth Supreme Court's contract-interpretation methodology
Summary of this case from Creekside Homeowners Ass'n v. Creekside Golf Course, LLCexplaining that Oregon’s constitutional "home rule" provisions permit "the people of cities or towns to determine for themselves the organization and powers of their local governments without the need to obtain authority from the state legislature"
Summary of this case from Childers Meat Co. v. City of Eugenedescribing ORS chapter 42 rules of interpretation as maxims of construction under Yogman, although observing that some of those rules could be implicated at earlier stages of the Yogman analysis
Summary of this case from Copeland Sand & Gravel, Inc. v. Estate of DillardFull title:PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
Court:Oregon Supreme Court
Date published: Aug 13, 2002
Filed: February 5, 2003. On remand from the Oregon Supreme Court, State v. Lucio-Camargo, 334 Or. 491, 52…
State v. SweeneyOn appeal, defendant argues that the trial court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal…