Larsen v. Nooth
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Per curiam
*525Petitioner, who was required to wear an electronic restraint device at his criminal trial, *485appeals from a judgment denying post-conviction relief on his claim that his trial counsel was inadequate and ineffective for not objecting to the use of the electronic restraint or requiring that a record be made to justify the use of the restraint. He raises two assignments of error. In the first, he contends that the post-conviction court erred when it concluded that he was not entitled to relief absent a showing of actual prejudice. However, as petitioner recognizes, that contention is foreclosed by…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Sproule v. CourseyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. MerrillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
- Lankford v. CainCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022
- State v. Mosqueda-Rivera-BurdetteCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
- State v. Mosqueda-Rivera-BurdetteCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2025
- State v. P. F.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2026
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.