State v. Cassada
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtJoseph, C. J.
Defendant was convicted by a jury of driving under the influence of intoxicants. ORS 487.540. Because of a prior conviction for driving while suspended, defendant was tried under the provisions for enhanced punishment in former ORS 484.365. He assigns three errors.
First, he argues that the trial court erred in taking from the jury the question whether he was under the influence of intoxicants at the time of the act in question. The primary defense at trial was that defendant’s acquaintance, and not defendant, was driving the car when the officer stopped it. In his opening statement, defense…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Burgett v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Baldasar v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- State v. GrenvikOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. NaughtenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1971
- State v. GibsonOregon Supreme Court · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. OroscoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1992
- State v. WilsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984
- LaMarche v. State of OregonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
- State v. CassadaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
- State v. Cervantes-OropezaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.