From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Bradshaw

Oregon Court of Appeals
Mar 27, 1984
674 P.2d 1190 (Or. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

20-414; CA A20459

Remanded from United States Supreme Court June 23, 1983, Affirmed January 18, 1984 Reconsideration denied February 24, 1984 Petition for review denied March 27, 1984 ( 296 Or. 712)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Tillamook County.

Delbert B. Mayer, Judge.

Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant.

David B. Frohnmayer, Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent.

Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


In State v. Bradshaw, 54 Or. App. 949, 636 P.2d 1011 (1981), rev den 292 Or. 568 (1982), we determined that, under Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477, 101 S Ct 1880, 68 L Ed 2d 378 (1981), the trial court erred in admitting statements made by the defendant after he had requested an attorney. The United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded. Oregon v. Bradshaw, ___ US ___, 103 S Ct 2830, 77 L Ed 2d 405 (1983).

We denied defendant's motion to file supplemental briefs and to make additional argument based on Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution. The proffered argument was not made in the trial court. Defendant's brief raises no other issues. Pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision, defendant's conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Bradshaw

Oregon Court of Appeals
Mar 27, 1984
674 P.2d 1190 (Or. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

State v. Bradshaw

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. JAMES E. BRADSHAW, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Mar 27, 1984

Citations

674 P.2d 1190 (Or. Ct. App. 1984)
674 P.2d 1190

Citing Cases

State v. Fuller

Although Hartley involved a situation in which the police resumed communications with the defendant, there is…