Legal Opinion

State v. Cartwright

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided February 26, 2004No. CC 97CR1088; CA A101495; SC S48816PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGillette, J.

In this criminal proceeding, defendant contends that the trial court erred by quashing subpoenas and denying various motions that were aimed at obtaining certain prior statements of persons whose testimony the state planned to introduce against defendant at trial. The trial court quashed the subpoenas and denied the motions on the grounds that the statements, which were recorded on audiotapes, were in the possession and control of a third party and were protected from disclosure under the so-called “work-product doctrine.” On defendant’s appeal, the Court of Appeals upheld the trial judge’s…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. FosterOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Co. v. Century Home Components, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1971
  4. State v. CartwrightCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  5. Pacific Nw Bell Tel. v. Century Home ComponentsOregon Supreme Court · 1972

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State v. BaughmanOregon Supreme Court · 2017
  2. State v. LongoOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State v. BrayOregon Supreme Court · 2018
  4. State v. BrayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  5. State v. HightowerOregon Supreme Court · 2021

13 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