From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Moore

Supreme Court of Oregon, En Banc.
Feb 27, 2014
354 Or. 835 (Or. 2014)

Summary

upholding search of driver's breath based on express voluntary consent at time of arrest

Summary of this case from State v. Banks

Opinion

(CC 091131 CA A145081 SC S60134).

2014-02-27

STATE of Oregon, Petitioner on Review, v. Jesse James MOORE, Respondent on Review.

On respondent on review's petition for reconsideration filed January 2, 2014; considered and under advisement on February 19, 2014. * Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, Salem, filed the petition for reconsideration. No appearance contra.


On respondent on review's petition for reconsideration filed January 2, 2014; considered and under advisement on February 19, 2014.


Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, Salem, filed the petition for reconsideration. No appearance contra.
PER CURIAM.

Defendant has petitioned for reconsideration of our decision in State v. Moore, 354 Or. 493, 318 P.3d 1133 (2013), which reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals and the order of the circuit court and remanded the case to the circuit court for further proceedings. Defendant raises a number of arguments for reconsideration of our opinion on the merits, which we reject without discussion. However, defendant correctly notes that the Court of Appeals declined to address two alternative bases for affirmance that defendant had advanced in that court. State v. Moore, 247 Or.App. 39, 47 n. 4, 269 P.3d 72 (2011). Defendant now asks this court to remand the case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of those issues in the first instance. We agree that we should do so. We accordingly allow the petition for reconsideration and modify our disposition of this case as follows: The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals to consider defendant's alternative grounds for affirmance.

The petition for reconsideration is allowed. The former opinion is adhered to as modified.

Appeal from an order of the Tillamook County Circuit Court, Mari Garric Trevino, Judge. 247 Or.App. 39, 269 P.3d 72 (2011).


Summaries of

State v. Moore

Supreme Court of Oregon, En Banc.
Feb 27, 2014
354 Or. 835 (Or. 2014)

upholding search of driver's breath based on express voluntary consent at time of arrest

Summary of this case from State v. Banks

sustaining constitutionality of statutory implied consent scheme

Summary of this case from State v. Raymond

sustaining constitutionality of statutory implied consent scheme

Summary of this case from State v. Raymond

noting that Machuca is consistent with federal constitutional law, which rejects a per se exigency rule for alcohol dissipation (citing Missouri v. McNeely , 569 U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 1552, 185 L.Ed.2d 696 (2013) )

Summary of this case from State v. Andersen

noting that, in some circumstances, to revisit and repudiate precedent can "subvert public confidence in the integrity of our processes—the ultimate source of any court's authority"

Summary of this case from State v. Joseph Richard Civil

stating that "advice that evidence of the refusal or failure 'may be offered against you' is a true statement" and is "not coercive"

Summary of this case from State v. Lopez-Lopez
Case details for

State v. Moore

Case Details

Full title:STATE of Oregon, Petitioner on Review, v. Jesse James MOORE, Respondent on…

Court:Supreme Court of Oregon, En Banc.

Date published: Feb 27, 2014

Citations

354 Or. 835 (Or. 2014)
354 Or. 835

Citing Cases

State v. Lopez-Lopez

At the time of the suppression hearing in this case, we had concluded, under Article I, section 9, of the…

State v. Mazzola

As the state points out, McNeely addressed the narrow issue of whether the natural dissipation of alcohol in…