Legal Opinion
State v. Sweet
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided July 5, 1977No. C 76-06-08860,CA 7200PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, J.
Defendant appeals from his conviction of Rape in the First Degree, ORS 163.375, contending that a pretrial photographic identification procedure was impermissibly suggestive and that he was denied effective assistance of counsel.
On June 11, 1976, a 12 year old girl was forcibly raped. She ran home, and the police were called. She gave the police a description of her attacker from which a composite drawing was made. The description included the fact that the rapist had a chipped, discolored front tooth.
Sometime later a police officer showed six photographs of different men including defendant…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- State v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
- State v. BushCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977
- State v. McBainCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
- Turner v. CuppCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1970
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sweet v. CuppCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Talmage L. Ellis v. Nicholas ArmenakisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Earl L. Sweet v. Hoyt C. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary, James Arthur Henderson v. Hoyt C. Cupp, Superintendent, Oregon State PenitentiaryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981