Hinton v. Hill
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtBrewer, C. J.
Petitioner appeals a judgment granting post-conviction relief, arguing, among other things, that the post-convic-ti©n court erred by failing to conclude that her convictions were void after finding that, before entering her no contest pleas, petitioner was not informed of the maximum sentences that could be imposed. We review the court’s legal conclusions for errors of law. Ashley v. Hoyt, 139 Or App 385, 391, 912 P2d 393 (1996). We vacate the judgment and remand with instructions to grant the relief requested by petitioner.
We state the pertinent facts as found by the post-conviction court or…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Stevens v. StateOregon Supreme Court · 1995
- Dixon v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
- Ashley v. HoytCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- Hartzog v. KeeneyOregon Supreme Court · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hinton v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 2006
- Hinton v. HillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- State Of Iowa, Vs. Cary Lee StrawSupreme Court of Iowa · 2006
- State v. StrawSupreme Court of Iowa · 2006
- State v. StrawSupreme Court of Iowa · 2006