Legal Opinion

Dotta v. Maass

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 18, 1988No. 87-C-10142; CA A45506PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarden, P. J.

Petitioner appeals the dismissal of his second petition for post-conviction relief. He alleged that, when he was convicted of sexual abuse in the first degree and kidnapping in the second degree, he was deprived of the right to a jury trial, did not validly waive the right to a jury and was denied effective assistance of trial counsel. He had entered pleas of guilty and no contest. We affirm.

ORS 138.550(3) provides, in relevant part:

“All grounds for relief claimed by petitioner in a petition pursuant to ORS 138.510 to 138.680 [for post-conviction relief] must be asserted in the original or…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Church v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Hetrick v. KeeneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  3. Hetrick v. KeeneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  4. Dotta v. KeeneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
  5. Gordon v. KeeneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Zebroski v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware · 2010
  2. Martz v. MaassCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  3. David L. Adams v. R.S. Peterson, Superintendent of O.S.C.I.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
  4. David L. Adams v. R.S. Peterson, Superintendent of O.S.C.I.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API