Willamette Law Online

Oregon Court of Appeals

( 27 summaries )

Opinions Filed in January 2013

Campbell v. State

Parole and Post-Prison Supervision: An inmate is not eligible to receive "good time" credit for his first sentence, under ORS 421.120, when he is serving consecutive sentences. Also, a date set for when an inmate is eligible for parole is not a reduction of his sentence.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

Franklin v. Employment Dept.

Employment Law: When a claimant, during a negotiated resolution, has agreed to a stipulated order with her employer in which she agrees to a temporary suspension of her license, misconduct has not occurred as defined by ORS 657.610(4).

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

Garner v. Taylor

Family Law: A trial court cannot, on its own motion, set aside a prior judgment of visitation rights absent extraordinary circumstances.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

Ogle v. Nooth

Post-Conviction Relief: Under ORS 138.580, documentation attached to a post-conviction petition are sufficient as long as they verify, corroborate, or substantiate the claims made in the petition that the petitioner aims to prove.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

Ross v. Franke

Post-Conviction Relief: ORS 138.580 requires a petitioner to attach documentary evidence to support allegations in his petition.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

State v. A.J.C.

Criminal Procedure: According to "State v. M.A.D." the determination for what is reasonable under a school-safety search depends on the nature of the safety threat. If the search is determined reasonable, then it is not a violation of a student's rights under Article 1, section 9 of the Oregon Constitution.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

State v. Nelson

Appellate Procedure: A motion for relief from default order from the Circuit Court does not qualify as an appealable order under ORS 138.053.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

State v. Wesley

Criminal Law: The doctrine of transferred intent exists for murder in Oregon despite it not having been codified in the Oregon Revised Statutes. Also, when determining the reliability of an eyewitness identification, it is proper for the Court to apply the test put forth by the Supreme Court in Lawson/James and analyze system and estimator variables.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

Uhl v. Krupsky

Property Law: The statutory requirement under ORS 105.620 requiring an "honest belief of actual ownership" for claims of adverse possession does not apply to parties extinguishing an easement across their land through adverse possession.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

Walker v. Providence Health System Oregon

Workers Compensation: Pursuant to ORS 656.268(5)(d), an employer must respond to a request for claims closure within 10 days, and failure to respond will result in a penalty equal to 25 percent of the benefits the employee is determined to be entitled to.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

Wood Park Terrace Apartments Limited Partnership v. Tri-Vest, LLC

Contract Law: Under Oregon contract law, the statute of limitations for negligence claims begins to accrue at the moment established in the contract.

(Filing Date: 01-30-2013)

City of Harrisburg v. Leigh

Land Use: In a judgment award for fixtures placed by a trespassing city onto an owner's property to the owner, when the city condemns the property, the value of the improvements and fixtures must be included in the fair market value assessment of the condemnation proceeding.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

Holbrook v. Blacketter

Post-Conviction Relief: Under OEC 401, testimony of trial counsel is not irrelevant merely because the Supreme Court reversed a decision of the Bar trial panel.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

State v. Beck

Criminal Law: A conviction under “criminally negligent homicide” encompasses the former crime of “negligent homicide” and cannot be set aside regardless of satisfaction of the other requirements for setting aside previous convictions.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

State v. Maciel

Criminal Procedure: An officer has reasonable suspicion to stop a person when the officer subjectively believes the person has committed a crime and that belief is objectively reasonable in the totality of the circumstances. Reasonable suspicion must be based on specific articulable facts of the crime suspected to be objectively reasonable.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

State v. Miller

Criminal Law: Judicial review on whether there was probable cause to issue a warrant is limited to a determination of whether the issuing judge could have reasonably concluded the affidavit established probable cause, given the facts and reasonable inferences.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

State v. Weiner

Criminal Procedure: Under the unavoidable lull rule, it is not an unconstitutional seizure for an officer to make inquiries unrelated to a traffic stop while that officer is waiting for the results of a records check, so long as those inquiries do not unlawfully expand the stop.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

Thomas v. Dept. of Land Conservation and Development

Property Law: Private real property that is owned by the same owner is "contiguous" for purposes of Measure 49, regardless of whether or not the lots designated for proposed development are connected by a common border. If each lot is connected by property owned by the same person, it is contiguous property.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

Three Rivers Education Association v. Three Rivers School District

Administrative Law: An order fails substantial reason if finding no causal connection between two decisions while also finding one decision to be the impact of the other.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

Tran v. Board of Chiropractic Examiners

Administrative Law: ORS 684.100 authorizes the Board of Chiropractic Examiners to (1) discipline individuals practicing chiropractic without a license, and (2) impose up to $10,000 in civil penalties per violation.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

Walker v. D.M.V.

Administrative Law: Under ORS 813.440(1)(d) "illness" is a condition of the body or mind impeding an officer's attendance at a hearing and exhaustion can constitute "illness" where it caused the belief that he was not well enough to drive to the hearing.

(Filing Date: 01-16-2013)

Dept. of Human Services v. G.J.R.

Juvenile Law: A juvenile court has jurisdiction in a case on an additional allegation if there is sufficient evidence, from which a reasonable fact-finder could conclude by a preponderance of the evidence, either that a current risk of harm to the child exists from the additional allegation standing alone, or that the additional allegation contributes to or enhances the risk associated with the already established bases of jurisdiction.

(Filing Date: 01-09-2013)

OR-OSHA v. CBI Services, Inc.

Employment Law: To determine whether an employer is guilty of a "serious violation" under ORS 654.086(2) by means of constructive knowledge and its employee's action, the relevant inquiry is not whether an employer could have known, with reasonable diligence, of the violation, but rather should the employer have known of the violation.

(Filing Date: 01-09-2013)

PIH Beaverton, LLC v. Super One, Inc.

Contract Law: Under ORS 12.135(3), an improvement to real property is considered substantially complete when the contractee has accepted the completion in writing or when a contractee has accepted construction that actually has been completed.

(Filing Date: 01-09-2013)

State v. Johnson

Appellate Procedure: Under ORS 138.690, a criminal defendant lacks the right to appeal a trial court's order dismissing his motion requesting DNA evidence.

(Filing Date: 01-09-2013)

State v. Marshall

Criminal Procedure: Voluntary consent to a search will not be found where a reasonable person would believe that a promise of immunity from prosecution would result from their consent.

(Filing Date: 01-09-2013)

State v. Murr

Criminal Procedure: Under ORS 135.747, “period of time” to bring a defendant to trial begins when the information is filed with the court and not with the service of citations.

(Filing Date: 01-09-2013)