# State v. Montigue

> Oregon Supreme Court · January 22, 1980 · 288 Or. 359

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9598477

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. TERRY EDWARD MONTIGUE, Petitioner
- **Court:** Oregon Supreme Court
- **Decided:** January 22, 1980
- **Citations:** 288 Or. 359; 605 P.2d 656; 1980 Ore. LEXIS 730
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Holman
- **Judges:** Tongue, Linde, Lent, Denecke, Holman
- **Cited by:** 56 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9598477

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that, when a named citizen informant initiates a report based on a personal observation to a police officer, that citizen is presumed to be credible and reliable, because the citizen is subjecting himself or herself to potential civil liability
- discussing some relevant factors in assessing credibility of informant and reliability of information
- discussing rationale for deeming named citizen informant reliable when that citizen initiates a report of a crime to a law enforcement agency
- establishing a higher evidentiary standard for probable cause determinations
- discussing reasons for deeming information from named informants reliable

## Opinion text

HOLMAN, J.,
dissenting.
I agree with that part of the dissent of Lent, J., which holds that the naming of the informant alone is insufficient to prove his probable veracity, that the affidavit is therefore defective, and that the majority opinion’s so-called additional factors are nothing more than an argument that name alone is sufficient and is an example of pulling one’s self up by one’s bootstraps.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9598477. Public record. Not legal advice.