State v. Heintz
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.
Defendant petitions for reconsideration of our decision reported in State v. Heintz, 34 Or App 175, 578 P2d 447 (1978). The purpose of this opinion is to state our reasoning with respect to defendant’s third assignment of error, discussion of which was omitted from our original opinion.
Defendant contends in his third assignment that the trial court erred in denying his motion to set aside the judgment and grant a new trial. The motion was based upon two acts of alleged misconduct by the trial judge. First, the trial judge, together with the court reporter and the bailiff, dined with the jury…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. CummingsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
- State v. HeintzCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
3Cited by7 opinions
- Pena v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1983
- Christensen v. CoberCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
- State v. BarmonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
- State v. BarmonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
- State v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.