Legal Opinion
Reeve v. Maass
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided February 12, 1992No. 90-C-10150; CA A65481PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.
Petitioner seeks review of the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief on the ground that it was not timely filed. ORS 138.510(2). We affirm.
He makes essentially four arguments in support of his assignment of error. We have answered the first two against him in Boone v. Wright, 110 Or App 281, 822 P2d 719 (1991), and Bartz v. State of Oregon, 110 Or App 614, 825 P2d 657 (1992).
The third argument is that application of the statute would violate constitutional protections against ex post facto legislation. Ex post facto laws are prohibited by both the Oregon and the federal…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Collins v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- State v. GallantOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. BurkeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
- Boone v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
- Joseph Milling Co. v. First Bank of JosephOregon Supreme Court · 1923
3Cited by4 opinions
- Boone v. WrightOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- Sumner v. ChoateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Flett v. McGeeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Sumner v. ChoateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992