Legal Opinion

Datt v. Hill

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 11, 2010No. CC 05024238M; CA A130434; SC S056842PublishedCited by 44 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWalters, J.

In this post-conviction case, the post-conviction trial court denied petitioner’s claim for relief and recorded on the judgment that it based its decision on a “failure of proof.” In a divided decision, the Court of Appeals reversed that judgment, concluding that the post-conviction trial court’s explanation did not satisfy the requirement of ORS ISS.bdiXl) 1 that the post-conviction judgment “clearly state the grounds on which the cause was determined.” Datt v. Hill, 220 Or App 657, 188 P3d 384 (2008). The majority reasoned that ORS 138.640(1) was intended to require post-conviction trial…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  4. Young v. RagenSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  5. Trujillo v. MaassOregon Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by44 opinions

  1. Jenkins v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison SupervisionOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  2. State v. RainoldiOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Verduzco v. State of OregonOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  4. Ogle v. NoothOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Snider v. Production Chemical Manufacturing, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2010

39 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