holding that a "quid pro quo was apparent" when detectives told the defendant he could admit what had occurred and get "help" or his case would be taken "to a grand jury" and it would be "real rough"
Summary of this case from State v. Chavez-Meza1995.
holding that a "quid pro quo was apparent" when detectives told the defendant he could admit what had occurred and get "help" or his case would be taken "to a grand jury" and it would be "real rough"
Summary of this case from State v. Chavez-MezaFull title:PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
Court:Oregon Supreme Court
Date published: Jan 1, 1995
Id. at 525. Defendant argues, however, under State v. Lumpkin, 129 Or. App. 601, 880 P.2d 468 (1994), adhered…
State v. StanleyWe have held, however, that in order to justify the frisk, the officer must articulate a particularized…