Case law

DeHart v. Tofte

326 Or. App. 720 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 6, 2023

defendant Schwanz’s post “was look- ing for students to share stories and experiences about hav- ing worked with Chair Brown in that capacity” and that that “post’s connection to public school and to public school students clearly … See Neumann, 295 Or App at 344 (defendant’s act of publishing such an opin- ion online qualified as “conduct in furtherance of * * * the constitutional right of free speech” for purposes of ORS 31.150(2)(d), because the right

State v. Bowman

326 Or. App. 565 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 22, 2023

test evidence is admissible in a DUII proceeding to establish that a defen- dant was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.” … Defendant was clearly aware of O’Key, and, based on her failure to refer 574 State v.

Marteeny v. Brown

321 Or. App. 250 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Aug 10, 2022

Adams instructed the Attorney General to both prepare the pardon and identify the individuals who would qualify: “I pray you therefore to prepare, for my Signature this morning a Pardon for each of the criminals … The legislature has established dis- trict attorneys’ authority and duties in a series of statutes in ORS chapter 8. ORS 8.610 - 8.652.

Board of Cty. Comm. of Columbia Cty. v. Rosenblum

324 Or. App. 221 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 15, 2023

any state or federal law”; provides that such person “shall be liable to the injured party in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress”; and purports to strip “sovereign” and “governmental” immunity … US Const, Art III, § 1 (“The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”); Or Const, Art VII (Amended

State v. Gardner-Rolph

345 Or. App. 681 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 17, 2025

The legislature has used such phrases when enacting statutes designed to overlay the guidelines (such as ORS 161.737), and thus, the legislature understands how to clearly craft statutes that are meant to function in tandem … Requires the court to give substan- tial weight to a qualifying mental health evaluation of a juvenile defendant who committed an offense before age 18 * * * includ[ing] an assessment of the person’s degree of

Mountain Woodworks, Inc. v. Voss

218 Or. App. 707 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Mar 19, 2008

In Miller , the plaintiff filed a declaratory judgment action seeking to inspect and copy records of a water district corporation established under ORS chapter 554. … Clearly, under the Wyatt test, the trial court had no opportunity to rule on that issue.

State v. Cocke

161 Or. App. 179 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 23, 1999

The Oregon Supreme Court has, however, clearly applied the officer safety principle of Bates in evaluating the permissible intrusiveness of both pre- and post-arrest searches. In State v. … A conjecture that there might be people who might have a motivation to interfere with an investigation some time in the next half hour hardly qualifies as a reasonable suspicion of an "immediate" threat of serious physical

City of Portland v. Bartlett

304 Or. App. 580 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jun 10, 2020

Cite as 304 Or App 580 (2020) 593 “[t]he initiative and referendum powers reserved to the people by subsections (2) and (3) of this section are further reserved to the qualified … Using the well-established statutory interpretation framework described in State v.

Strawn v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon

233 Or. App. 401 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jan 27, 2010

a limited number of attorneys willing and able to take on complex, controversial, and high risk employment cases like the one at issue; (2) the evidence showed that the plaintiffs had experienced difficulty in obtaining qualified … Plaintiffs respond that they clearly “preserved” a common fund on appeal.

State v. Lavitsky

171 Or. App. 506 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 20, 2000

Clearly, both cannot be correct. For the reasons stated below, I conclude that Henderson is an anomaly and should be overruled. [1] It is inconsistent with several of our subsequent cases. … But we also agree with defendant that the provision qualifies as an erroneous term.

Central Oregon Landwatch v. Jefferson County

Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 2024

Specifically, as DLCD specifically advised the county, because petitioner’s proposal requested two-acre lots, which qualify as an urban use, OAR 660-004-0040(7), “the county may not approve an exception to Goal 14 based on … The exact nature and extent of the areas found to be irre- vocably committed to urban levels of development shall be clearly set forth in the justification for the exception.

Central Oregon Landwatch v. Jefferson County

Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 1, 2024

Specifically, as DLCD specifically advised the county, because petitioner’s proposal requested two-acre lots, which qualify as an urban use, OAR 660-004-0040(7), “the county may not approve an exception to Goal 14 based on … The exact nature and extent of the areas found to be irre- vocably committed to urban levels of development shall be clearly set forth in the justification for the exception.

Cumming v. Nipping

310 Or. App. 780 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 21, 2021

At some point, however, they discovered that the property did not qualify for conventional financing, due to its condition and other circumstances, and had to be pur- chased for cash. … Bona Fide Purchasers without Notice Having concluded that plaintiff established the first requirement, we proceed to the second Tupper requirement: establishing that defendants were not “bona fide purchas- er[s]

State v. Johnson

329 Or. App. 588 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 20, 2023

On appeal, we con- cluded that the defendant had clearly sought to invoke his right of self-representation and that the trial court erred, because “rather than establishing that defendant’s waiver was knowing and intelligent … Mansor, 363 Or 185, 421 P3d 323 (2018), established new standards for warranted searches of com- puters.

State v. Benton

317 Or. App. 384 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Feb 9, 2022

Sines also did not overrule or abrogate Smith, despite expressly acknowledging the test that Smith sets out for determining whether a jailhouse informant qualifies as a state agent. … However, because the informa- tion obtained by Layman was clearly delineated by the dates on which it was obtained through the recorded proffers, we reject defendant’s argument that all of defendant’s state- ments must be

State v. Thorp

166 Or. App. 564 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Apr 19, 2000

Here, it established a defense for persons less than three years older than the victim, not three years and 10 days. … Thus, at the time of the crime, defendant had no juvenile adjudications that would qualify as "criminal history" as that term is generally used in the context of sentencing. [5] The lead opinion's treatment of the first Solem

State v. Howard

325 Or. App. 696 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 3, 2023

The state did not present any evidence that defendant’s conduct had any physical effect on N’s corpse, let alone an effect that would qualify as physical mistreatment. … However, defen- dant was convicted by unanimous verdicts, as established by a jury poll, so the instructional error was harmless. See State v.

DeHart v. Tofte

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Jul 6, 2023

defendant Schwanz’s post “was look- ing for students to share stories and experiences about hav- ing worked with Chair Brown in that capacity” and that that “post’s connection to public school and to public school students clearly … See Neumann, 295 Or App at 344 (defendant’s act of publishing such an opinion online qualified as “conduct in furtherance of * * * the consti- tutional right of free speech” for purposes of ORS 31.150(2)(d), because the right

State v. Paz

31 Or. App. 851 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Dec 5, 1977

United States, 308 U.S. 338 , 60 S.Ct. 266 , 84 L.Ed. 307 (1939), the court qualified the rule of Silverthorne by noting that although there might be a causal connection between the "poisoned tree" and the evidence offered … Although he was initially arrested, he was clearly discharged from custody and sent home. He was brought to the station the next day voluntarily. He was not told he was under arrest. No force was placed upon him.

State v. Hale

252 Or. App. 187 · Court of Appeals of Oregon · Sep 6, 2012

As to the wiretap order, [the codefendants] alleged that evidence gained under that order should be suppressed because the application for the order had relied on evidence gained from the invalid body-wire to establish probable … Harris, 566 F3d 422, 433 (5th Cir 2009), cert den, _US _., 130 S Ct 1687 (2010), the defendant argued that the district court judge who issued the warrant did not qualify as a “neutral and detached” magistrate because “he