State v. Metcalfe
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLeeson, J.
The issue in this original proceeding in mandamus is whether the trial court had authority to grant defendant-adverse party’s (defendant’s) motion for judgment of acquittal after the jury had found him guilty of Escape in the Second Degree and to find him guilty of Attempted Escape in the Second Degree. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the trial court lacked authority to grant defendant’s post-verdict motion. Accordingly, we direct that a peremptory writ of mandamus shall issue.
Defendant was indicted on a single count of Escape in the Second Degree, ORS 162.155(l)(a), based on…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Smalis v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- State v. ChakerianOregon Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. McKenzieOregon Supreme Court · 1989
- Fox v. Country Mutual InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Rodriguez v. the Holland, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. VoghCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- State v. ScottCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- State v. AngeloCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
- State v. MorenoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.