Legal Opinion

Johnston v. Jung

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided February 27, 2013No. C104622RO; A147683PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant was found in contempt of court for having violated a restraining order, and the trial court then entered a judgment stating that defendant was “convicted” of violating the order. On appeal, defendant argues that the judgment erroneously reflects that he was “convicted” of an offense when, in fact, he was not. State v. Caldwell, 247 Or App 372, 375 n 1, 270 P3d 341 (2011) (“A conviction for contempt is not a proper disposition. See State v. Campbell, 246 Or App 683, 267 P3d 205 (2011) (accepting state’s concession that contempt is not a crime and that the court erred in entering a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. ReynoldsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  2. State v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  3. State v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. LarranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  2. State v. CoughlinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  3. State v. McVeinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  4. State v. JamesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API