Oregon Supreme Court

Opinions Filed in April 2022

Mason/Turrill v. Rosenblum

A ballot title must include a caption of “not more than 15 words that reasonably identifies the subject matter of the state measure.” ORS 250.035(2)(a). ORS 250.035(2)(d) specifies, a summary must provide a concise and impartial statement. 

Area(s) of Law:
  • Ballot Titles

City of Portland v. Bartlett

Under ORS 192.390, public records shall be made available after twenty-five years “notwithstanding ORS 192.355.” ORS 192.355(9)(a) creates an exemption for the disclosure of privileged documents.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Civil Procedure

State v. Harris

The Wiretap Act requires a “principal prosecuting attorney” to authorize wiretaps and it prohibits courts from admitting evidence collected from a wiretap in violation of the act. 18 USC §§ 2515 - 2516.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

Eklof v. Persson

Petitioner could not reasonably have raised Brady claims in the prior post-conviction proceeding. Accordingly, the Court held the Petitioner’s claims were not futile and the post-conviction court had abused its discretion in denying Petitioner leave to amend her complaint.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Johnson v. SAIF

ORS 656.214(1)(a) defines “impairment” as “the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury.” ORS 656.214(1)(a).

Area(s) of Law:
  • Workers Compensation

State v. Jackson

The Court reasoned that the legislature intended ORS 19.420(3) to apply when the lost record is “practically necessary” for commencing an appeal, presenting the issues to the appellate court, or for the court to resolve the issues on appeal. The Court found that the issue required the court to review the “totality of the circumstances” and therefore held that Exhibit 15 was practically necessary to do so.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Procedure

State v. Oatney

Kastigar has been used to determine the scope of derivative use immunity, and can be violated in two ways. First, a Kastigar violation can occur if the government uses the immunized information “to motivate another witness to give incriminating testimony.” Second, a violation can occur if the content of a witness’s subsequent testimony is “‘shaped, altered, or affected’ by such exposure.”

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

State v. Kyger

“Attempted aggravated murder involving the circumstance set out in ORS 163.095(1)(d) requires that the Defendant (1) intentionally; (2) caused the death of another human being; (3) when there was more than one murder victim in the same criminal episode”; and as set out in ORS 161.405 requires (4) “that an actor have “intentionally” engaged in “conduct” that constitutes a “substantial step” toward the commission of the crime.” State v. Kyger, 369 Or 363, 369, 375.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Criminal Law

Back to Top