Legal Opinion

State v. McKenzie

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 21, 1989No. TC C87-02-30673; CA A44952; SC S35592PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGillette, J.

The issue in this case is whether a criminal statute may be challenged for unconstitutional vagueness by a motion for a judgment of acquittal made at the conclusion of the State’s case. The Court of Appeals determined that such a challenge was not timely and affirmed defendant’s conviction without reaching the merits of his claim. State v. McKenzie, 92 Or App 647, 759 P2d 1123 (1988). Although we agree that a motion for a judgment of acquittal was not the proper method to challenge the constitutionality of the statute, we conclude that a remedy was available in the form of a motion in arrest…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Crist v. BretzSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. State v. ThomsonOregon Supreme Court · 1954
  3. State v. ChandlerOregon Supreme Court · 1929
  4. State v. ZusmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1969
  5. State v. GardnerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1974

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. State v. ShawOregon Supreme Court · 2005
  2. State v. ComptonOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State v. MaxwellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  4. State v. WeberCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  5. State Ex Rel. Penn v. NorbladOregon Supreme Court · 1996

22 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