Legal Opinion

Ogle v. Nooth

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 12, 2014No. CC 10108394P; CA A148493; SC S061162PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWalters, J.

This case requires us to interpret a provision of the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (PCHA), ORS 138.510 to 138.680. ORS 138.580 requires that a petitioner seeking relief under that act attach to the petition “[affidavits, records or other documentary evidence supporting the allegations of the petition ***.” We conclude that that statute requires a petitioner to attach materials, including the petitioner’s own averments of fact, that address each element of each asserted ground for relief and that, if presumed true, would permit the post-conviction court to determine that the petitioner was…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Trujillo v. MaassOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Montez v. CzerniakOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Stevens v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. State v. Clemente-PerezOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  2. Oregon Occupational Safety & Health Division v. CBI Services, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2014
  3. State v. PayneOregon Supreme Court · 2020
  4. Eklof v. StewardOregon Supreme Court · 2016
  5. State v. Giron-CortezOregon Supreme Court · 2024

29 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