Legal Opinion

Walls v. Nooth

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 9, 2016No. 10088309P; A158351PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Petitioner appeals a judgment denying his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, he raises three assignments of error. We reject all but one without discussion. We address only petitioner’s claim that the post-conviction court’s judgment does not comply with ORS 138.640(1) with respect to one of his claims for relief. Defendant concedes petitioner’s argument and agrees that "the post-conviction court did not comply with ORS 138.640(1).” We agree as well. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the court to include the findings required by ORS 138.640(1) with respect to petitioner’s…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Datt v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Myers v. BrockampCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Walls v. LaneyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API