(18 summaries)
Allie Overton
Oregon Supreme Court
| Title | Excerpt | Filling Date |
|---|---|---|
| State v. Blok | Appellate Procedure: The Court may exercise their discretion to dismiss an alternative writ if it is not presented in the relator's brief or petition. | (09-20-2012) |
Oregon Court of Appeals
| Title | Excerpt | Filling Date |
|---|---|---|
| State v. Bertha | Criminal Procedure: Mere acquiescence to an officer's command does not amount to consent to search a home without a warrant. | (04-24-2013) |
| Fostveit v. Poplin | Contract Law: 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. | (03-27-2013) |
| Cavitt v. Coursey | Post-Conviction Relief: 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. | (02-06-2013) |
| 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). | (01-30-2013) |
| Department of Human Services v. T.H. | Juvenile Law: 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. | (12-27-2012) |
| State v. Thompson | Criminal Procedure: 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. | (12-19-2012) |
| State v. Kowlaskij | Criminal Law: 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. | (12-05-2012) |
| State v. Barboe | Criminal Law: 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. | (11-07-2012) |
| State v. Kaylor | Criminal Law: 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. | (10-17-2012) |
| State v. Nichols | Evidence: 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. | (08-29-2012) |
| State v. Thompson | Criminal Law: 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. | (08-08-2012) |
| State v. Graham | Criminal Law: 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. | (07-18-2012) |
| State v. Ibarra-Ruiz | Evidence: 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. | (06-27-2012) |
| State v. Martinez | Sentencing: 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. | (06-06-2012) |
| Berg and Berg | Family Law: 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. | (05-16-2012) |
| State v. Onishchenko | Evidence: 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. | (04-25-2012) |
| State v. Alonzo | Criminal Procedure: 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. | (03-28-2012) |