Allie Overton

Oregon Supreme Court (1 summary)

State v. Blok

The Court may exercise their discretion to dismiss an alternative writ if it is not presented in the relator's brief or petition.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Appellate Procedure

Oregon Court of Appeals (30 summaries)

State v. Andrade

Ballot Measure 11 and ORS 137.700 convictions of first-degree rape and first-degree sodomy do not require that the court impose consecutive mandatory minimum sentences.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

Cannon v. Dept. of Justice

Plaintiff commences a timely action under the Oregon Tort Claims Act, and ORS 30.275(2)(b), when he files an action within 180 days of injury and serves Defendant within 60 days of filing.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

State v. Richardson

A photograph depicting a fully-clothed child touching a person's leg who is engaged in sexual activity with a naked woman constitutes first-degree encouraging child sexual abuse under ORS 163.684. Additionally, a photograph that depicts a fully-clothed child standing near two people who are in a sexual situation constitutes using a child a in a display of sexually explicit conduct under ORS 163.670.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Cain

When a business record is maintained in the ordinary course of business, and there is a duty to report, the document qualifies as admissible hearsay under OEC 803(6). Additionally, it is a plain error to impose post-judgment interest on restitution awarded for non-economic damages.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

State v. Evans

An exception to OEC 504(2), ORS 419B.040(1) allows for the admissibility of therapists testimony, as long as the testimony references only exculpatory or inculpatory information regarding the abuse of the child in the case being decided.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

State v. Ashcroft

When a trial court properly grants a motion to continue under ORS 135.763(2), after the district attorney receives notice from Defendant requesting a speedy trial under ORS 135.760 to 135.765, the trial court is not required to dismiss the case if time lapsed is greater than 90 days.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Watts

Admission of improper character evidence is not harmless when it relates to a central factual issue at bar.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

State v. Farokhrany

When prosecutors mention rape laws of the Middle East during voir dire in a case where the defendant is a Muslim from the Middle East, the court must grant a curative instruction to ensure the jury does not impermissible consider race and religion during deliberations.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Clayton v. DAS

Under ORS 195.318(3)(b), challenges must be preserved in order to be reviewed.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Administrative Law

State v. Beisser

Under OEC 404(1), a defendant may introduce evidence of victim's character and victim's prior violent acts against defendant when asserting the affirmative defense of self-defense, and when character is an essential element of the charge, claim or defense.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

Dept. of Human Services v. J.L.H.

Under the Indian Child Welfare Act the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the factual basis for terminating parental rights. Additionally, under ORS 419.504, the State must demonstrate the parent's conduct and environmental conditions are seriously detrimental to the child, and will not be resolved within a reasonable period of time.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Juvenile Law

State v. Finlay

(1) Under State v. Meharry, Defendant is not required to be driving the vehicle in order for the police to "encounter" the vehicle during a warrantless search. (2) An attached trailer qualifies as a "vehicle" for the purposes of the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. (3) Under Meharry, the automobile exception to the warrant requirement permits a warrantless search of a vehicle when the police have probable cause or the vehicle is mobile at the time of the encounter.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Magana

All evidence that is derived from a stop, without mitigating circumstances, must be purged from the illegal stop, unless there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity before the stop is made. Additionally, all evidence derived from an involuntary search must be suppressed if there are no intervening or mitigating circumstances present.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Bertha

Mere acquiescence to an officer's command does not amount to consent to search a home without a warrant.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Fostveit v. Poplin

A trial court does not err when it properly weighs the evidence on the record, and find that a party substantially performed on the contract.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Contract Law

Cavitt v. Coursey

Under ORS 138.580, "documentary evidence" is satisfied by an affidavit in support of a Petitioner's claim for post-conviction, and is enough evidence to support a claim for relief in Petitioner's claim for post-conviction relief.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Post-Conviction Relief

Franklin v. Employment Dept.

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).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Employment Law

Department of Human Services v. T.H.

A judgment of the juvenile court is inadequate and not harmless error when the Department of Human Services does not state a compelling reason for the continuation of APPLA.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Juvenile Law

State v. Thompson

When an individual is stopped without a reasonable suspicion, asked for her identification, and questioned without a significant break in time between these events, the stop becomes unlawful and any evidence seized from such an encounter is to be suppressed.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Kowlaskij

When a person is charged with identity theft under ORS 165.800, the charging document's failure to identify the alleged victim who was injured or who was intended to be injured is not a material variance under ORS 135.725.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Barboe

Under ORS 161.155, Oregon does not recognize the aid-and-abet theory when the Defendant did not plan or commit the crime in question.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Kaylor

Under ORS 163.205(1)(a), criminal mistreatment in the first degree, an offender must affirmatively withhold something from the victim for it to be considered first-degree criminal mistreatment. Secondly, under ORS 162.285(1)(a), tampering with a witness, a defendant must reasonably and specifically believe that the victim will be called to testify at an official proceeding at the time the statements were made.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Nichols

Under OEC 702, an expert's testimony, if believed, must be of help or assistance to the jury. When the expert fails to show a connection between the opinion and the testimony to the facts, then the court may use it's discretion to exclude it.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

State v. Thompson

Because venue is a material allegation that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, a defendant can not be convicted of failure to register as a sex offender under ORS 131.325 if there is no direct evidence to prove defendant's location after the ten-day time period expired.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Graham

A release agreement is sufficient evidence to prove knowledge of all trial and required court appearances. Also, when a defendant files a motion for judgment of acquittal due to insufficient evidence he must state the specific theory on which the proof is insufficient.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Ibarra-Ruiz

When a party makes an objection, his explantion of his position must be specific enough to give enough clarity to the court to identify its alleged error and to allow it to consider and correct the error immediatly, if needed.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

State v. Martinez

In absence of any evidence on the record to support a particular amount awarded for restitution, the Court can exercise its discretion to correct the plain error.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Sentencing

Berg and Berg

ORS 107.105(1) requires that the division of marital property be "just and proper in all circumstances," Spousal support awards should be based on the trial court's discretion and supported by evidence in the record.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Family Law

State v. Onishchenko

In order to establish the amount of a compensatory fine, the market value of a chattel may be ascertained through the testimony of the owner, unless it is shown that the owner does not have knowledge of the market value of the item.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Evidence

State v. Alonzo

Under ORCP 59 H(1), there are two situations that bar appellate review if the party does not preserve its objection: (1) An erroneous instruction from the trial court; and (2) Refusing to deliver a parties’ requested instruction.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Back to Top