Legal Opinion

State v. Bowen

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 26, 2007No. 040935242; A129141PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, P. J.

Defendant appeals his convictions for multiple felony sex offenses. He assigns error to (1) the denial of his motion for mistrial, (2) the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury that it could convict as to each of the charges only upon a unanimous verdict, and (3) the imposition of consecutive sentences based on judicial findings. We reject the first assignment of error without discussion and the third assignment of error based on the reasoning of State v. Tanner, 210 Or App 70, 150 P3d 31 (2006). For the reasons that follow, we also reject defendant’s asserted entitlement to a jury…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Apodaca v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. State v. TannerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
  5. State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007

3Cited by41 opinions

  1. Ramos v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
  2. Ramos v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
  3. State v. ArdizzoneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  4. State v. BowenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  5. State v. Camacho-AlvarezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009

36 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