Legal Opinion

State v. Booth

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided December 27, 1978No. CA 7261, SC 25617PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHowell, J.

Defendant was charged under ORS 164.055 1 with unlawfully and knowingly committing theft of a ring from a jewelry store. He gave notice of intent to rely on the defense of insanity under ORS 161.295 and partial responsibility under ORS 161.300. 2 The trial court instructed on the insanity defense contained in ORS 161.295. Defendant’s request for an instruction on partial responsibility was refused by the trial court. He was convicted and appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that the court committed reversible error in failing to instruct on the partial responsibility defense. The…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Lakeside v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. State v. FrancisOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  3. State v. StockettOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  4. State v. NewlinOregon Supreme Court · 1919
  5. State v. LakesideOregon Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Robert Muench v. Thomas Israel and Attorney General of Wisconsin, Richard Worthing v. Thomas R. IsraelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
  2. State v. ThompsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. State v. HicksCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  4. State v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
  5. Pfeiffer v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1979

9 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