1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.2d
  4. 918 P.2d
  5. 918 P.2d 419 (1996)
 

STATE v. KEENEY

CC 92-05-1143, 92-05-1144, 92-05-1146, 92-03-0630; CA A78976; SC S41492, SC S41495, SC S41497, SC S41498, SC S41499, SC S41555.

918 P.2d 419 (1996)

323 Or. 309

STATE of Oregon, Respondent on Review, v. James Dalton KEENEY, Joyce Laverne Keeney, Kerry James Keeney, and Krysia Ann Nivison, Petitioners on Review. STATE of Oregon, Respondent on Review, v. Kerry James KEENEY, Ronnie Michael Jones, Michael C. Flick, and Rayma Jones, Petitioners on Review. STATE of Oregon, Respondent on Review, v. Gary Leon NIVISON, Krysia Ann Nivison and Kerry James Keeney, Petitioners on Review. STATE of Oregon, Respondent on Review, v. Thomas Robert BRADY, Respondent, and Kerry James Keeney and Edward Lawrence Ames, Petitioners on Review.

Supreme Court of Oregon, En Banc.

Decided June 13, 1996.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Robert J. McCrea, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the petition for petitioners on review Joyce Laverne Keeney, James Dalton Keeney, and Michael C. Flick. With him on the petition were Forrest Reid, Albany, and Elton T. Lafky, Salem.

David Moule, of Moule & Frank, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the petition for petitioner on review Edward Lawrence Ames.

Helen L. Cooper, of Ferder, Ogdahl, Brandt & Casebeer, Salem, filed the petition for petitioner on review Krysia Ann Nivison.

Neil F. Lathen, of Burt, Swanson, Lathen, Alexander, McCann & Smith, P.C., Salem, filed the petition for petitioner on review Gary Leon Nivison.

Richard E. Forcum, of Forcum & Speck, and Janine Curtis, Bend, filed the petition for petitioner on review Kerry James Keeney.

Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, and David E. Groom, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, filed the petition for petitioners on review Ronnie Michael Jones and Rayma Jones.

Jonathan H. Fussner, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent on review.

DURHAM, Justice.

Defendants are charged with conspiracy to manufacture a controlled substance, conspiracy to possess a controlled substance, and conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance, in violation of ORS 161.450 and 475.992. The trial court suppressed evidence of those crimes that was seized pursuant to four search warrants. The court found that several sworn statements of the affiant, made in support of the state's warrant applications, were untruthful. The...

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