Legal Opinion

State v. Sullens

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided October 22, 1992No. CC 89-CR-0005-TM; CA A62348; SC S38221PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFadeley, J.

The issue before this court is whether the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence is reviewable on appeal.

After a judgment of conviction of first degree burglary and theft was entered against defendant, he moved for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. ORCP 64B(4). 1 The trial court did not rule on defendant’s motion within the statutorily specified time limit and, therefore, the motion was deemed denied. 2

Defendant appealed from the judgment of conviction and assigned the denial of the motion for new trial as the only error.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. State v. EvansOregon Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Thomas v. DAD'S ROOT BEER, ETC.Oregon Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Benson v. BirchOregon Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Walther v. SAIF CorporationOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. MontgomeryOregon Supreme Court · 1983

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Gaston v. ParsonsOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Safeport, Inc. v. Equipment Roundup & Manufacturing, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  3. Mendieta v. STATE, DIVISION OF STATE LANDSCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
  4. State v. TooleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  5. In re the Marriage of HutchinsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003

19 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