January 0 summaries
February 1 summary
Arrowood Indemnity Co. v. Fasching
Eligibility for the business records exception under OEC 803(6) depends upon: (A) the record itself having the characteristics required by OEC 803(6) and (B) “evidence of the record-making practices of the business that created the record.” Allan v. Oceanside Lumber Co., 214 Or 27, 328 P2d 327 (1958).
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
March 7 summaries
State v. McKinney/Shiffer
In the case of a bench trial, the trial court's failure to consider the culpable mental state for the serious physical injury element of an assault offense is not harmless. State v. Marrington, 355 Or 555, 565-66 (2003). Similarly, in the case of a jury trial, a jury instruction that fails to instruct the jury as to the culpable mental state for the serious physical injury element is not harmless. Hernandez v. Barbo Machinery Co., 327 Or 99, 106-07 (1998).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Owen
Under ORS 163.175, a person commits second-degree assault if the person “[i]ntentionally or knowingly causes physical injury to another by means of a deadly or dangerous weapon,” and under ORS 161.095(2), no culpable mental state attaches to the result element of second-degree assault.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Ford
Ford presented the same issue decided in State v. Kyger, where the Court determined that “[t]he occurrence of multiple deaths is required for the completed crime of aggravated murder, but it is not required for the inchoate crime of attempted aggravated murder.” 369 Or 363 (2022).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Kyger
For purposes of ORS 163.095(1)(d), “[t]he occurrence of multiple deaths is required for the completed crime of aggravated murder, but it is not required for the inchoate crime of attempted aggravated murder.” State v. Kyger, 369 Or 363 (2022).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v Meiser
Under ORS 161.295, the affirmative defense of GEI does not require proof that a lack of capacity is due solely to a mental disease or defect, such that an antisocial personality disorder played no part in the incapacity.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Brumwell
Under ORS 138.045, “dismissing or setting aside” is when a court issues an order ruling an accusatory instrument fails to state facts that constitute an offense, when a death penalty case is reopened, the new penalty phase hearing is like a new trial.
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
State v. Davidson
ORS 137.719(2) provides that a non-presumptive sentence for a sex crime that the court may depart from subsection (1) and impose a guidelines sentence for “substantial and compelling reasons.
Area(s) of Law:- Sentencing
April 8 summaries
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
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
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
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
May 3 summaries
State v. Rusen
Under ORS 138.105(9), “The appellate court has no authority to review any part of a sentence resulting from a stipulated sentencing agreement between the state and the defendant."
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
State v. Stanton
“In order to accept a defendant’s waiver of counsel, a trial court must determine—and the record must reflect—that the waiver is both intentionally and knowingly made.” State v. Meyrick, 831 P.2d 666, 132 (Or. 1992).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Salsgiver/Iannarone v. Rosenblum
Pursuant to ORS 250.035, a ballot measure’s caption must state its actual major effect and its summary must be an impartial statement outlining the measure’s major effects.
Area(s) of Law:- Ballot Titles
June 4 summaries
Abraham v. Corizon Health, Inc.
Pursuant to ORS 659A.400(2), “public accommodation does not include . . . a local correction facility . . . [or] an institution, bona fide club or place of accommodation that is in its nature distinctly private.”
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Robinette v. SAIF
ORS 656.214 defines “impairment” as “the loss of use or function of a body part or system due to the compensable industrial injury.”
Area(s) of Law:- Workers Compensation
Querbach v. Dept. of Human Services
“ ‘Reasonable cause’ is a subjectively and objectively reasonable belief, given all of the circumstances and based on specific and articulable facts.” OAR 413-015-0115(58).
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Lowell v. Wright
The First Amendment public comment defense applies when the speech involves a public concern and can be examined using a true-false analysis. Neumann v. Liles, 358 Or 706, 714 (2016).
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
July 7 summaries
Dahlton v. Kyser
In a wrongful death claim, beneficiaries are not parties and therefore cannot be compelled to produce privileged medical information relating only to their own treatment arising from loss of decedent's society and companionship.
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
Gist v. ZoAn Management, Inc.
Under ORS 652.360(1), employers cannot create “special contract[s] or any other means” to circumvent statutes related to paying wages.
Area(s) of Law:- Arbitration
Scott v. Kesselring
“[T]he issue of liability for harm actually resulting from defendant’s conduct properly depends on whether that conduct unreasonably created a foreseeable risk to a protected interest of the kind of harm that befell the plaintiff.” Fazzolari v. Portland School Dist. No. 1J, 303 Or. 1, 17 (1987).
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
State v. Benson
“To succeed on a claim of a due process violation caused by a preindictment delay, a defendant must ‘show that the delay actually prejudiced the defendant, and that the government culpably caused the delay.’” State v. Stokes, 350 Or 44, 64 (2011).
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Hickey v. Scott
Under ORS 90.394(3), a valid termination notice must specify the amount of rent that must be paid to cure nonpayment, the amount must be precise and accurate.
Area(s) of Law:- Landlord Tenant
Lowell v. Medford School District. 549c
Absolute privilege applies when the public’s interest in functioning government is so great that it outweighs an individual’s interest in redress for reputational harm. Shearer v. Lambert, 274 Or 449, 547 P2d 98 (1976).
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
State v. Gray
Or Const, Art I, §11, of the Oregon Constitution entitles Defendant to have his counsel present in the grand jury room during his testimony.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
August 2 summaries
State v. Carlisle
A person commits third degree sexual abuse when “(a) [t]he person subjects another person to sexual contact and: (A) [t]he victim does not consent to the sexual contact[.]” ORS 163.415(1).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Hershey
Article I, section 17 of the Oregon Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial in civil cases that historically used jury trials before the Oregon Constitution was enacted and “cases ‘of like nature.’” Horton v. Or. Health & Sci. Univ., 376 P3d 998 (Or. 2016).
Area(s) of Law:- Wildlife Law
September 1 summary
E.J.T. v. Jefferson County
The Vulnerable Person Act allows for a suit against a public body. Additionally, the child-abuse-reporting statutes do not create a liability for a public body.
Area(s) of Law:- Tort Law
October 7 summaries
Sills v. State
The fugitive dismissal rule grants appellate courts the authority to dismiss an appeal made by a defendant who fled the court’s jurisdiction. State v. Moss, 352 OR 46, 50-51 (2012).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Shedrick
Under ORS 161.095(2), to obtain a conviction, the state must prove that the defendant “acts with a culpable mental state with respect to each material element of the offense that necessarily requires a culpable mental state.”
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Thompson
The exigency exception to warrantless seizures requires that the police have probable cause and that an exigent circumstance, one that requires prompt action, exists. State v. McCarthy, 369 Or. 129, 142 (2021). Police cannot extend the exigent circumstance by not promptly seeking a warrant. State v. Fondren, 285 Or 361, 366-67 (1979).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Murdoch v. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles Servs. Div.
Under ORS 813.130 (2017), officers are required to inform drivers of the enumerated rights and consequences of refusing a breathalyzer and shall present the information “substantially in the form prepared by the Department of Transportation.” Additional explanation of legal consequences is not prohibited.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Burris
ORS 166.250(1) states “except as otherwise provided under ORS . . . 166.270 . . . a person commits the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm if the person knowingly: . . . (C) [h]as been convicted of a felony[.]” ORS 166.270(4) provides exceptions to being a felon in possession of a firearm if the person has only been convicted of one felony and they finished their sentence more than fifteen years ago.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v. Chitwood
“[A] defendant asserting plain error must demonstrate that the prosecutor’s comments were so prejudicial that an instruction to disregard them would not have been sufficiently curative to assure the court . . . that the defendant received a fair trial.” State v. Montez, 324 Or. 343, 357 (1996).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Chaimov v. State
Under ORS 173.130(2), “[u]pon the written request of a state agency, the Legislative Counsel may prepare or assist in the preparation of legislative measures that have been approved for preparation . . . .”
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
November 4 summaries
Dept. of Human Services v. F. J. M.
Under ORS 419B.337, juvenile courts can order parents to engage in “treatment or training” which is “needed by [the] parent to correct the circumstances that resulted in wardship.”
Area(s) of Law:- Juvenile Law
I. H. v. Ammi
Under OEC 507-1, correspondence between a certified advocate and victim is privileged unless the victim has brought an action against the certified advocate or the program that the certified advocate works through.
Area(s) of Law:- Evidence
State v. Ralston
When making a post-trial claim of prejudice, the defendant must show “a more concrete likelihood” that there was “actual prejudice” that affected the preparation for the defense. State v. Mende, 304 OR 18, 22-23 (1987).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
State v. Fox
Under the American Rule, crime victims who have filed civil lawsuits are able to recover economic damages but they are precluded from recovering attorney fees.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
December 11 summaries
State v. Colgrove
ORS 138.105(5) states “[t]he appellate court has no authority to review the validity of the defendant’s plea of guilty or no contest, or a conviction based on the defendant’s plea of guilty or no contest.”
Area(s) of Law:- Appellate Procedure
Jimenez v. Dep’t of Revenue
ORS 305.437(2) provides, in pertinent part, “(a) A taxpayer’s position is ‘frivolous’ if there was no objectively reasonable basis for asserting that position[; and] (b) ‘[p]osition’ means any . . . argument asserted by a taxpayer without regard to any other . . . argument asserted by the taxpayer.”
Area(s) of Law:- Tax Law
Skinner and Skinner
“[W]here a money award has been modified on appeal and the only action necessary in the trial court is compliance with the mandate of the appellate court, then the interest on the award, as modified, should run from the date of the original judgment.” Lakin v. Senco Products, Inc., 329 Or. 369 (1999).
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
State v. H.D.E.
“[A] person initiates [a] false report ‘if the person falsely alleges new circumstances to which the law enforcement agency is reasonably likely to respond as a current separate crime or emergency itself.’” State v. Branch, 362 Or 351, 368 (2018).
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
State v Delaney
Under ORS 132.560(3), a court may sever claims from joinder when “the state or defendant is substantially prejudiced by a joinder of offenses . . .”
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Huggett v. Kelly
Under Watkins v. Ackley, 370 Or. 604, 523 P.3d 86 (2022), petitioners are eligible for post-conviction relief when their cases were decided by nonunanimous jury verdicts, unless the State raises a procedural defense.
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
Jones v. Brown
Under Watkins v. Ackley, 370 Or. 604, 523 P.3d 86 (2022), the Court held that Ramos applied to all decisions decided by nonunanimous juries, even if the decisions were finalized before Ramos.
Area(s) of Law:- Post-Conviction Relief
Picker v. Dep’t of Revenue
“Where payment of the [disputed] tax, penalty, and interest would be an undue hardship, plaintiff may file an affidavit alleging undue hardship.” ORS 305.419(3).
Area(s) of Law:- Tax Law
Scott-Schwalbach v. Rosenblum
For a certified ballot title, “The caption must ‘reasonably identif[y] the subject matter”; “the ‘yes’ result statement” must state “the result” of measure approval; and the summary must summarize the “measure and its major effect.” ORS 250.035(2)(a), (b), and (d).
Area(s) of Law:- Ballot Titles
State v. Martin
“A parolee must have an opportunity to be heard and to show . . . if he did [violate parole conditions], that circumstances in mitigation suggest that the violation does not warrant revocation.” Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 488 (1972).
Area(s) of Law:- Constitutional Law
Watkins v. Ackley
Under ORS 138.530(1)(a), post-conviction relief based on the denial of constitutional rights is appropriate when the rights at issue are “consequential in the criminal [] proceeding” and “offensive to our judicial sense of fairness.” Brooks v. Gladden, 226 Or 191, 204 (1961) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus