1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 145 P.3d
  5. 145 P.3d 151 (2006)
 

LINCOLN INTERAGENCY NARCOTICS v. KITZHABER

(CC 00C-19878; CA A115401; SC S50900 (control), S50904).

145 P.3d 151 (2006)

341 Or. 496

LINCOLN INTERAGENCY NARCOTICS TEAM (LINT), a law enforcement agency created by intergovernmental agreement, Respondent on Review, and Lincoln County, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon, Plaintiff, and Animal Legal Defense Fund, Oregon Humane Society, Humane Society of the Willamette Valley, Stephan K. Otto, Sharon M. Harmon and Wayne S. Geiger, Respondents on Review, v. John KITZHABER, M.D., Governor of the State of Oregon, Bill Bradbury, Oregon Secretary of State, and the State Of Oregon, Petitioners on Review, and Ray Heslep and Sandra Adamson, Petitioners on Review.

Supreme Court of Oregon.

Decided October 19, 2006.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Philip Schradle, Special Counsel to the Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause and filed the briefs for petitioners on review John Kitzhaber, M.D., Bill Bradbury and State of Oregon. With him on the briefs were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General.

Eli D. Stutsman, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for petitioners on review Ray Heslep and Sandra Adamson.

Robert E. Bovett, Newport, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent on review LINT.

B. Carlton Grew, Portland, filed the brief for respondents on review Animal Legal Defense Fund, Oregon Humane Society, Humane Society of the Willamette Valley, Stephan K. Otto, Sharon M. Harmon, and Wayne S. Geiger.

Before CARSON, Chief Justice, and GILLETTE, DURHAM, DE MUNIZ, BALMER, and KISTLER, Justices, and RIGGS, Justice pro tempore.

GILLETTE, J.

The issue in this case is whether Ballot Measure 3 (2000) (Measure 3), a constitutional amendment that the people adopted pursuant to the initiative process, actually contains two or more constitutional amendments in violation of Article XVII, section 1, of the Oregon Constitution.1 A divided panel of the Court of Appeals held that the measure does contain two or more amendments because it makes at least two substantive changes...

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