Legal Opinion

State v. Macy

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 20, 1993No. CC 27992; CA A66654; SC S39053PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

In this criminal case, defendant brought a delayed appeal that had been authorized by a post-conviction court.1 The Court of Appeals declined to reach the merits posed by that delayed appeal, holding instead that the post-conviction court “lacked authority to grant defendant another appeal.” State v. Macy, 111 Or App 83, 86, 824 P2d 428 (1992). Under those circumstances, the court held, it had no choice but to affirm defendant’s conviction. Ibid. The Court of Appeals erred. In 1969, this court recognized that the Post-Conviction Hearing Act, ORS 138.510 to 138.680, “authorizes granting of a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Shipman v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1969
  2. Baugh v. Bryant Limited PartnershipsOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State v. MacYCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brock v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  2. State v. MacYOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State v. MacyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API