Legal Opinion · Dissent

City of Portland v. Ayers

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 9, 1988No. 304441-8508; CA A40979Published

1DissentNewman, J.

The majority holds that defendant did not preserve the issue of overbreadth under Article I, section 8. The majority is wrong. Defendant preserved the issue. We can and should consider it and hold the ordinance to be overbroad under Article I, section 8.

The majority concedes that in the trial court, defendant raised and argued the overbreadth issue under Article I, *744section 8.1 Moreover, the trial court specifically considered the issue of overbreadth when it ruled on the demurrer.2

In his appellate brief, defendant cites and relies on Article I, section 8, and argues that the ordinance…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Haguer v. Committee for Industrial OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  2. State v. KennedyOregon Supreme Court · 1983
  3. State v. RobertsonOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Sterling v. CuppOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Cooper v. Eugene School District No. 4JOregon Supreme Court · 1986

6 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