Legal Opinion

State v. Campbell

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 23, 2011No. 10030469D; A146974PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant appeals a misdemeanor conviction for contempt based on a violation of a pretrial release agreement. Defendant argues that because contempt is not a crime, see State v. Reynolds, 239 Or App 313, 243 P3d 496 (2010), the trial court erred, initially, in denying his motion to dismiss the charging instrument and, later, in convicting him of a misdemeanor. The state, for its part, concedes that contempt is not a crime but argues that the appropriate remedy was not dismissal of the indictment but rather “entry of a judgment that does not characterize contempt of court as a criminal…

2Cases cited1 opinion

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. HauskinsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  2. Fernando Diaz-Quirazco v. William BarrCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
  3. State v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  4. Johnston v. JungCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  5. State v. PoitraCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

4 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