Legal Opinion

Armatta v. Kitzhaber

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 1998No. CC 96C-14060; CA A96736; SC S44995PublishedCited by 115 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*252CARSON, C. J.

This is a certified appeal involving a direct challenge to the constitutionality of Ballot Measure 40 (1996),1 a “crime victims’ rights” initiative that was approved by the voters at the 1996 general election. The circuit court enjoined defendants Kitzhaber and the State of Oregon (collectively referred to herein as “the state”) from enforcing section (2) of Measure 40, after concluding that that section revised, rather than amended, the Oregon Constitution. The state appealed to the Court of Appeals, which certified the appeal to this court.

As this case is presented to us, the…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Boykin v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Priest v. PearceOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Kadderly v. PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1903

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

3Cited by115 opinions

  1. State v. ToevsOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Stranahan v. Fred Meyer, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State v. WilliamsOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  4. State v. FugateOregon Supreme Court · 2001
  5. League of Oregon Cities v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 2002

110 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