STATE v. SLOWIKOWSKI

85-3779-C-2; CA A39836.

743 P.2d 1126 (1987)

87 Or.App. 677

STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. Mark Joseph SLOWIKOWSKI, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

Resubmitted March 12, 1987.

Decided October 14, 1987.

Reconsideration Denied December 4, 1987.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Carl Caplan, Medford, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Stephen F. Peifer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., and Virginia L. Linder, Sol. Gen., Salem.


Resubmitted In Banc March 12, 1987.

VAN HOOMISSEN, Judge.

Defendant appeals his convictions on two counts of possession of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992(4). He contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence because search and arrest warrants were issued based on a prior unlawful search by police using a trained dog. The dispositive issue is whether a dog-sniff is a search. On these specific facts, we conclude that a dog...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases