Legal Opinion

State v. Knighten

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 20, 1967PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant, after a plea of guilty to the charge of obtaining money by false pretenses, was later given an enhanced .sentence as required by the Habitual Criminal Code, OES 168.015 et seq. On this appeal from the sentence, defendant again challenges the unconstitutionality of the alleged discriminatory use of the statute by the prosecutor, and because the statutes do not permit trial by jury, that they are, in effect, ex post facto, that it does not require grand jury proceedings and for other reasons.

Substantially every issue presented by defendant has been decided by this court, adversely to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. CusterOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  2. State v. ByrdOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  3. State v. HowellOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Haynes v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1967
  5. State v. EllisOregon Supreme Court · 1964

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. QuinnOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  2. State v. EdwardsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970
  3. State v. YostCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977
  4. State v. QuinnOregon Supreme Court · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API