State v. Fessenden

355 Or. 759, 333 P.3d 278 (2014)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
S
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

State v. Fessenden

Oregon Supreme Court
355 Or. 759, 333 P.3d 278 (2014)

Facts

Fessenden and Dicke (defendants) jointly owned a horse that remained on Dicke’s property. Neighbors observed that the horse appeared to be starving and reported the matter to the sheriff’s office. Upon arrival, the responding officer could see the horse in a pasture in plain view from the driveway. The officer believed the horse to be suffering from malnourishment and in need of immediate medical treatment. Thus, the officer believed that Fessenden and Dicke had committed the crime of animal neglect. Knowing that the horse may die before a warrant could be obtained, the officer entered the property, took the horse, and immediately transported it to a veterinarian. Dicke and Fessenden were charged with animal neglect. At the criminal trial, the defense tried to suppress evidence from the officer’s seizure, claiming that it was obtained in violation of state statutes on warrant requirements and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The State of Oregon (plaintiff) claimed that the emergency-aid and exigent-circumstances exceptions applied. The trial court denied Fessenden and Dicke’s motion to suppress the evidence, and a jury convicted them of the charged crimes. Fessenden and Dicke appealed, arguing that the evidence should have been suppressed. The court of appeals affirmed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Walters, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Animal Law

Key Terms