Legal Opinion

Lopez v. Nooth

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 13, 2017No. 12129813P; A159785PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.

Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, he assigns error to the post-conviction court’s denial of his motion to substitute counsel. As discussed below, we conclude that the post-conviction court’s determination that counsel was suitable was based on an incorrect understanding of a post-conviction counsel’s obligations following the filing of a Church motion. Church v. Gladden, 244 Or 308, 417 P2d 993 (1966). Accordingly, we reverse and remand.

Petitioner’s post-conviction claim began with the filing of a pro se petition. Appointed counsel…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. RogersOregon Supreme Court · 2000
  2. State v. MayfieldOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Church v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1966
  4. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Espinoza v. Evergreen Helicopters, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2016

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Newmann v. HighbergerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
  2. Bacon v. CainCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
  3. Evans v. NoothCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  4. Winstead v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  5. Bell v. HendricksCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API