Court Opinion

ID: 9549088
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 18:13:06.640373+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:19:49.316807
License: Public Domain

GILLETTE, J.,
specially concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority opinion, and in much of what that opinion says. However, I consider the belabored discussion of State v. Keller, 265 Or 622, 510 P2d 568 (1973), a towering waste of time. Keller was decided during a schizophrenic period in which the Oregon Supreme Court could not settle on a course to follow concerning to the respective search and seizure provisions of the state and federal constitutions. The court has now found a course — unwisely, in my view, but definitively nonetheless — and we need look no further than State v. Lowry, 295 Or 337, 667 P2d 996 (1983) to tell us that the search here was impermissibly intrusive.
Joseph, C. J., Warden and Young, JJ, join in this specially concurring opinion.