Legal Opinion

Trotter v. Santos

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 5, 2007No. CV031304; A125574PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant petitions for reconsideration of our opinion in Trotter v. Santos, 212 Or App 473, 157 P3d 1233 (2007), in which we held that petitioner’s criminal trial counsel provided inadequate assistance because counsel failed to request a jury instruction on lesser-included offenses and that petitioner was thus entitled to post-conviction relief. Defendant argues in his petition that we misapplied the burden of proof. Specifically, defendant points to our statement that “there is no indication that [petitioner’s] criminal trial counsel made a tactical decision not to request the instruction.”…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. CunninghamOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Trotter v. SantosCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pereida-Alba v. CourseyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  2. State v. RugglesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  3. State v. BerryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  4. Bostwick v. CourseyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  5. State v. BerryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API