From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Thomas

Oregon Court of Appeals
Aug 1, 1978
33 Or. App. 69 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)

Opinion

No. 9760, CA 8443

Argued January 18, affirmed March 1, reconsideration denied April 12, petition for review denied August 1, 1978

Appeal from Circuit Court, Coos County.

John C. Warden, Judge.

John W. Burgess, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were James A. Redden, Attorney General, and Al J. Laue, Solicitor General, Salem.

David Groom, Certified Law Student, Salem, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, and Thomas J. Crabtree, Deputy Public Defender, Salem.

Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Johnson, Joseph and Roberts, Judges.


Affirmed.

JOSEPH, J.


The state appeals an order suppressing the fruits of a warrantless search. The authority for the search is claimed to be that defendant was required as a condition of probation to submit to such searches by police officers. The condition was invalid. State v. Fisher, 32 Or. App. 465, 574 P.2d 354 (1978).

No issue is raised whether defendant, having accepted the challenged condition, can collaterally attack it in this proceeding, and we express no opinion on that question.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Thomas

Oregon Court of Appeals
Aug 1, 1978
33 Or. App. 69 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)
Case details for

State v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. DAVID LEE THOMAS et al, Respondents

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Aug 1, 1978

Citations

33 Or. App. 69 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)
575 P.2d 171

Citing Cases

State v. Gawron

Oregon has reached the same result as Fogarty in considering such "search" conditions. State v. Fisher, 32…