Legal Opinion

Short v. Hill

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 13, 2004No. CV99-1375; A116372PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KANTOR, J. pro tempore

Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition for post-conviction relief. Petitioner argued that his representation at his underlying burglary trial was constitutionally defective because his trial counsel, among other things, failed to introduce expert testimony to corroborate his assertion that, because he was suffering from methamphetamine withdrawal, he was unable to form the requisite criminal intent. At the post-conviction hearing, he introduced an affidavit from a psychiatrist generally stating that cessation of methamphetamine use could cause a person…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. State v. KennedyOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  3. Stevens v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Horn v. HillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  5. New v. ArmenakisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pinnell v. PalmateerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  2. Norwood v. PremoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  3. Snyder v. AmsberryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  4. Brenner v. NoothCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  5. Jenkins v. CainCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API