Hearing
Source:
Section 133.555 — Hearing, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors133.html
.
See also annotations under ORS 141.030, 141.050 and 141.060 in permanent edition.
Notes of Decisions
Under former similar statute (ORS 141.030)
Search warrant cannot issue except on probable cause. State v. Metler, 6 Or App 356, 487 P2d 1377 (1971); State v. Fahey, 7 Or App 23, 489 P2d 980 (1971)
Probable cause must be shown from facts of affidavit. State v. Metler, 6 Or App 356, 487 P2d 1377 (1971); State v. Fahey, 7 Or App 23, 489 P2d 980 (1971)
Same factors usually create sufficient probable cause to justify arrest, search, seizure or any combination thereof. State v. Temple, 7 Or App 91, 488 P2d 1380 (1971), Sup Ct review denied, cert. denied, 406 US 973
Failure of issuing judge to make and keep record of affiant’s oral testimony supplementing affidavit as required by this section does not justify exclusion of evidence seized under search warrant where issuing judge testifies to substance of supplemental testimony establishing probable cause for issuance of warrant and defendant is not otherwise prejudiced by lack of recordation. State v. Mathis, 24 Or App 53, 544 P2d 170 (1976)
In general
The fact that one place may have been more likely spot in which to find evidence sought did not prevent magistrate from concluding that there also existed probable cause to search another property for the same or similar evidence. State v. Villagran, 294 Or 404, 657 P2d 1223 (1983)
Where affidavit established affiant’s knowledge and experience in marijuana growing operations, and information by three citizen informants suggested that marijuana growing operation existed in defendant’s structure, and where informants independently cross-corroborated each others’ information and affiant could independently corroborate by personal observation portions of informants’ information, and where power company records showed unusual power consumption in winter months and defendant’s shed had recently-installed roof vents, the magistrate did not err in finding probable cause to believe evidence of marijuana growing operation would be found in defendant’s shed. State v. Prince, 93 Or App 106, 760 P2d 1356 (1988), Sup Ct review denied
Court did not consider defendants’ challenge to certain facts within affidavit supporting warrant because affidavit contained sufficient facts which were acquired independently of challenged information to support issuance of warrant. State v. Riggs/Hirning, 99 Or App 151, 781 P2d 395 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
Where there was sufficient basis for reasonable magistrate to conclude there probably was evidence of car theft operation on defendant’s property, court erred in granting defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to warrant. State v. Dunn, 99 Or App 519, 783 P2d 29 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
Probable cause requirement for issuance of warrant was met when officer’s investigation developed information from which magistrate could conclude more likely than not that seizable things would be found in place to be searched. State v. Chambless, 111 Or App 76, 824 P2d 1183 (1992), Sup Ct review denied
Where written duplicate warrant prepared by police officer materially exceeded scope of oral authorization for telephonic warrant, search executed under duplicate warrant was unconstitutional even though it was within scope of oral authorization. State v. Martin/Dills, 170 Or App 366, 12 P3d 548 (2000)
Whether magistrate could reasonably conclude that probable cause existed to issue warrant is reviewed by appellate court independently of review conducted by trial court. State v. Castilleja, 345 Or 255, 192 P3d 1283 (2008)
COMPLETED CITATIONS: State v. Skinner, 5 Or App 259, 483 P2d 87 (1971), Sup Ct review denied
Law Review Citations
Under former similar statute (ORS 141.030)
7 WLJ 456 (1971)
In general
68 OLR 267 (1989)