Legal Opinion

State v. Sullens

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 17, 1991No. 89-CR-0005-TM; CA A62348PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.

Defendant appeals his convictions, after trial, for burglary in the first degree and theft in the first degree. ORS 164.225; ORS 164.055. He seeks review of the trial court’s order denying his motion for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence. We have jurisdiction of defendant’s appeal under ORS 138.053(1)(a) but do not have authority to review the issue he raises. We therefore affirm.

Defendant makes only one assignment of error: The trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence. The state argues that we do not…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ragnone v. Portland School District No. 1JOregon Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State v. MontgomeryOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Mangus v. Progress Quarries, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1981

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. SullensOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State v. SullensCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  3. State v. TejedaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  4. State v. WimberCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  5. State v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991

1 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