Legal Opinion

Holbrook v. Blacketter

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 16, 2013No. CV051636; A135654PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtSercombe, J.

Petitioner appeals a judgment denying his claims for post-conviction relief. He raises five assignments of error, all but one of which we reject without discussion. We write only to address petitioner’s contention that the post-conviction court erred in excluding trial counsel’s testimony — given as part of an Oregon State Bar disciplinary proceeding— on the ground that it was irrelevant. Petitioner argues that the testimony is relevant to his post-conviction claim that his trial counsel was constitutionally inadequate. Specifically, petitioner argues that it is relevant to show trial…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Troutman v. ErlandsonOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  2. In Re Conduct of TichenorOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State v. HolbrookCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  4. Petersen v. PalmateerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Holbrook v. AmsberryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API