Legal Opinion

State v. Phillips

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 28, 2010No. 93C21516; A137773PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

In State v. Phillips, 234 Or App 676, 229 P3d 631 (2010), defendant appealed from a judgment of contempt, raising four assignments of error. He subsequently filed a pro se supplemental brief raising two additional assignments of error. We rejected his first assignment of error on the ground that it was not preserved, and, in a footnote, we expressly rejected the remaining three assignments of error in his opening brief. In a petition for reconsideration, defendant points out that we did not expressly dispose of the assignments of error in his pro se supplemental brief. Defendant is correct.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. PhillipsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. PhillipsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API