Stoeckert v. Nooth

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Post-Conviction Relief
  • Date Filed: 02-25-2015
  • Case #: A150615
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: DeVore, J., for the Court; Garrett, P.J.; & Schuman, S.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 138.580 and Ogle v. Nooth, 355 Or. 570 (2014), in order to receive a hearing, a petitioner for post-conviction relief need only show prima facie evidence “sufficient to submit the case to the factfinder” that, if true, would permit the court to rule in favor of the petitioner.

Petitioner appealed a judgment dismissing his post-conviction relief petition due to petitioner’s lack of documentation. Petitioner argued that many of the claims raised before the post-conviction court required no additional documentation, and that the affidavits provided to the post-conviction court were sufficient to show a prima facie case for inadequate trial counsel, thereby requiring a post-conviction hearing. After the post-conviction court dismissed petitioner’s case, the Oregon Supreme Court decided Ogle v. Nooth, 355 Or. 570, 330 P.3d 572 (2014), which held that a post-conviction petitioner need only show prima facie evidence “sufficient to submit the case to the factfinder.” This means, if the content of the attached evidence is admissible, and if true, and the court would be permitted to rule for petitioner, then a hearing before the post-conviction relief court is required. Reversed and remanded.

Advanced Search