Legal Opinion

Mora v. Maass

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 12, 1993No. 91C-10630, 91C-11530, 91C-11061, and 91C-10445 CA A71969 (Control), CA A71954, CA A71982 and CA A71983PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment granting habeas corpus relief to plaintiffs. We granted defendant’s motion to consolidate. ORAP 2.30. Plaintiffs were all convicted of delivery of controlled substances, and their sentences were enhanced, because their crimes “occurred as part of a drug cultivation, manufacture or delivery scheme or network.” ORS 475.992; OAR 253-04-002(3) appendix 4. The habeas corpus court vacated their sentences on the ground that the “scheme or network” language in the sentencing guidelines is unconstitutionally vague. Or Const, Art I, §§ 20,21; State v. Moeller, 105 Or…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bartz v. State of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  2. State v. MoellerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  3. State v. MoellerOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Landreth v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Mueller v. BenningOregon Supreme Court · 1992

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Long v. ArmenakisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  2. Norris v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  3. Hardin v. PopoffMultnomah County Circuit Court, Oregon · 2016
  4. Gonzalez v. NOOTHCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. Cunningham v. MaassCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995

5 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