Legal Opinion

State v. Hickam

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 19, 1984No. 10-83-00249, 10-83-00250 CA 30635 (Control), CA A30636PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, J.

Defendant appeals his conviction on two counts of sexual abuse in the first degree, contending that the trial court erred in refusing to grant his motion to suppress certain statements, because: (1) he was in custody when the statements were made and therefore entitled to Miranda warnings before the time when they were given, and (2) the statements were involuntary. He also contends that the court erred in admitting evidence of his notice of intent to rely on lack of responsibility and lack of intent defenses, which were withdrawn before trial. Because we agree with the latter contention, we…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. California v. BehelerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. MiddletonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2007
  2. State v. MattilaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  3. State v. BarberCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  4. State v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
  5. State v. Vasquez-SantiagoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019

6 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