Legal Opinion

State v. Z. A. B.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 13, 2014No. 14MH0001; A156148PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him for a period not to exceed 180 days pursuant to ORS 426.130. Appellant argues, among other contentions, that the trial court plainly erred by failing to advise him of the right to subpoena witnesses under ORS 426.100(l)(d). See State v. M. L. R., 256 Or App 566, 570-71, 303 P3d 954 (2013) (failure to inform a person of the right to subpoena witnesses constitutes plain error warranting reversal); State v. Grellert, 144 Or App 201, 203, 925 P2d 161 (1996) (trial court erred when it advised the appellant that it would “hear” the allegedly…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. M. L. R.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  2. State v. GrellertCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  3. State v. V. B.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. R. C. S. (In re R. C. S.)Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
  2. State v. Z. A. B.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  3. State v. B. O.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  4. State v. K. M.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  5. State v. K. S. D. M.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2019

5 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