State v. Haines
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtOrtega, P. J.
Defendant appeals his judgment of conviction for five counts of identity theft, ORS 165.800. For part of his sentencing hearing, defendant was not represented by counsel, and he argues that his waiver of his right to counsel was invalid because it was not voluntarily and knowingly made, thus violating Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution.1 Reviewing the validity of defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel as a legal question in light of the circumstances of his particular case, State v. Erb, 256 Or App 416, 420, 300 P3d 270 (2013), we conclude that the record is insufficient to…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. MeyrickOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- State Ex Rel. Russell v. JonesOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. ColeOregon Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- State v. ErbCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. ClardyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
- State v. GroffCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
- State v. GarrettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
- State v. BorbaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
- State v. NeesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.