Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Smith

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 12, 1994No. CC C90-1537CR; SC S39030Published

1DissentFadeley, J.

Defendant in this death penalty case did not receive a fair trial because he was not permitted to prove his defense, even though the prosecutor produced similar but contrary evidence. Defendant’s main line of defense, of which statutory notice was given through counsel appointed to represent him, was that the jury should return a verdict of guilty except for insanity. Defendant bears the burden of proof on that plea. ORS 161.305, 161.055(2). That verdict, if returned, would not permit a death penalty; in this armed-robbery homicide case, commitment to the custody of the Psychiatric Security…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Rock v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. State v. HarbertsOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  4. Matter of Marriage of FromdahlOregon Supreme Court · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API