OR: “right result, wrong reason” rule not applied where it denies defense chance to litigate it

After reversal by the state supreme court and on remand, the state argued an alternative basis (“right result, wrong reason”) for affirming, but the court of appeals held that the alternative basis had not been raised before and couldn’t be argued now because the parties could have litigated it at the suppression hearing. State v. Fowler, 273 Ore. App. 20, 2015 Ore. App. LEXIS 975 (August 19, 2015).

Defendant simply isn’t believable on the question of oral consent to search. He contradicted himself on the stand about the existence of a consent form, he has seven felony convictions between age 15 and 38, and he waived his Miranda rights but not his right to refuse consent. United States v. Jones, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110081 (N.D.Ill. August 20, 2015).*

Because a suspect caught by the police agreed to set up a drug deal with the police taking over his cell phone and texting defendant directly, reasonable suspicion existed for a stop and use of a drug dog when defendant showed up. United States v. Mendoza, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109526 (N.D.Fla. August 18, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Burden of proof, Consent, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.