Case Name: CRABTREE et al, Petitioners, v. PAULUS, Respondent
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1984-01-24
Citations: 296 Or. 325
Docket Number: SC S30159
Parties: CRABTREE et al, Petitioners, v. PAULUS, Respondent.
Judges: PER CURIAM
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 296
Pages: 325–327

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted January 10,
ballot title certified as modified January 24, 1984
CRABTREE et al, Petitioners, v. PAULUS, Respondent.
(SC S30159)
675 P2d 488
Thomas Crabtree, Bend, argued the cause and filed the brief for petitioners. With him on the petition was Robert J. Larson, Eugene.
John A. Reuling, Jr., Special Counsel to the Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause and filed the memorandum for respondent. With him on the memorandum were David Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, Salem.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
This petition concerns the same ballot title examined in Remington v. Paulus, 296 Or 317, 675 P2d 485 (1984). Petitioners argue that the original title was insufficient or unfair because it created the impression that evidence seized in violation of the federal constitution would be admissible in criminal prosecutions. We believe that the modified ballot title answers this objection. They also argue that this title failed to advise the citizenry of the state that they are giving up a powerful tool and forfeiting several constitutional protections. Statements about the effect of proposed measures have no place in ballot titles. Teledyne Wah Chang v. Paulus, 295 Or 762, 767, 670 P2d 1021 (1983). They also contend that the use of the word "reliable" in the ballot title is unfair because the public could think that "reliable" indicates the evidence is necessarily truthful. We find that the use of this word is not unfair, if set off in quotation marks to show that the proposed amendment, rather than the respondent or this court uses this word.
Ballot title certified as modified in Remington v. Paulus, supra.