From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Yeomans

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jan 28, 1987
731 P.2d 1072 (Or. Ct. App. 1987)

Opinion

10-85-03342; CA A38068

Argued and submitted July 14, 1986.

Affirmed January 28, 1987.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Lane County, William A. Beckett, Judge.

Robert J. McCrea, Eugene, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and James E. Mountain, Jr., solicitor General, Salem.

Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


Defendant was convicted of unlawful possession of a controlled substance. On appeal, the sole issue is whether a warrant was necessary to open the "see through" ziplock bag, lawfully seized from defendant at the time of his arrest, and to test the white powder that was visible to the officer. The trial court held that no warrant was necessary and denied defendant's motion to suppress the test results. There is no error. State v. Owens, 302 Or. 196, 729 P.2d 524 (1986); cf. State v. Westlund, 302 Or. 225, 729 P.2d 541 (1986).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Yeomans

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jan 28, 1987
731 P.2d 1072 (Or. Ct. App. 1987)
Case details for

State v. Yeomans

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. THOMAS RUSSELL YEOMANS, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Jan 28, 1987

Citations

731 P.2d 1072 (Or. Ct. App. 1987)
731 P.2d 1072