Putnam v. Angelozzi

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Appellate Procedure
  • Date Filed: 05-18-2016
  • Case #: A152069
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Lagesen, J. for the Court; Duncan, P.J.; & Flynn, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 138.550(2), a petitioner seeking post-conviction relief may be eligible for relief based on issues not raised on direct appeal.

Putnam appealed from a judgment dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief following appellate proceedings. Under ORS 138.510, a petitioner seeking post-conviction relief does not allow a petitioner to assert grounds for relief that could reasonably have been asserted in direct appellate review proceeding. Putnam argued that he fell under ORS 138.510, which allows a petitioner to assert any ground for relief if the petitioner was not represented at the appellate proceedings due to lack of funds and the failure of the court to appoint counsel. The Court held that a petitioner may, under ORS 138.550(2), be eligible for post-conviction relief based on the possibly erroneous failure of the court to appoint counsel for the petitioner in a prior appellate review proceeding, but because Putnam rasied the argument belatedly it could not be decided without more information. Reversed and remanded.

Advanced Search