# State v. Amini

> Court of Appeals of Oregon · July 18, 2001 · 175 Or. App. 370

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9782582

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. DARIUSH DAVID AMINI, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Oregon
- **Decided:** July 18, 2001
- **Citations:** 175 Or. App. 370; 28 P.3d 1204; 2001 Ore. App. LEXIS 1058
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Haselton
- **Judges:** Deits, Edmonds, Landau, Haselton, Armstrong, Wollheim, Brewer
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9782582

## Opinion text

*387 HASELTON, J.,
concurring.
The dissent complains that the majority “repudiates without explanation” our prior decision on the “essential issue” in this case. See 175 Or App at 387 (Armstrong, J., dissenting). I was one of the judges who joined in our original majority opinion, State v. Amini, 154 Or App 589 , 963 P2d 65 (1998), and I have, in fact, “switched sides.” There is an explanation: When faced with new and ultimately compelling arguments, judges can, and should, change their minds.
In Amini I, we referred, collaterally, to federal precedent. See 154 Or App at 596-99 . However, because we did not reach the federal constitutional issues, we had no occasion to focus on, and grapple with, the principles that drive the majority’s analysis. I believe that analysis is unanswerable. Accordingly, I concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9782582. Public record. Not legal advice.