Legal Opinion

State v. Ross

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 27, 1998No. 9608-46110; CA A97506PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

After a trial to a jury, defendant was convicted of driving under the influence of intoxicants. ORS 813.010. She appeals and assigns error to the trial court’s denial of her objection to the prosecutor’s peremptory challenge of a prospective juror, arguing that the peremptory challenge violated her right to equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Defendant also contends that she should have been granted a new trial, ORCP 64 B, after the trial judge submitted revised jury instructions to the jury without first notifying counsel as required…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Hernandez v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Purkett v. ElemSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. State v. HendersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
  5. Lamonts Apparel, Inc. v. SI-Lloyd AssociatesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. Ruiz-MartinezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  2. State v. ClayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API