Legal Opinion

Pedroso v. Nooth

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 15, 2012No. 10017849P; A146409PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchuman, P. J.

Petitioner was convicted of murder after the jury rejected his defense that he was acting under an extreme emotional disturbance (EED) at the time of the killing. After an unsuccessful direct appeal, he filed a petition for post-conviction relief in which he alleged, among other claims, that his trial counsel provided constitutionally inadequate assistance by failing to communicate with him before trial, obtain a psychological evaluation of him, and otherwise present an EED defense. The state1 filed a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the petition, along with its attachments,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mueller v. BenningOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Young v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Handam v. Wilsonville Holiday Partners, LLCCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  4. Humphrey v. ColemanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Breece v. AmsberryUmatilla County Circuit Court, Oregon · 2016
  2. Dillard v. PremoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  3. Ogle v. NoothCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  4. Cavitt v. CourseyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  5. Delzell v. CourseyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013

1 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