Legal Opinion
State v. Barmon
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided March 14, 1984No. 20-791; CA A23867PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*371NEWMAN, J.
Defendant appeals his convictions for rape in the first degree, sexual abuse in the second degree and burglary in the first degree. He assigns as errors that the trial court (1) provided written answers to jury questions in the absence of defendant and his counsel and without notice to them and (2) ruled that statements that defendant made to Detective Schultze of the Washington County Sheriffs Office were admissible at trial. Because we hold that the trial court erred in not suppressing statements defendant made to Schultze, we reverse and remand for a new trial and do not consider…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Oregon v. BradshawSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Traylor v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
- State v. HebertSupreme Court of Kansas · 2004
- Haynes v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. GonzalezSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
- Verex Assurance, Inc. v. John Hanson Savings and Loan, Inc., and Maduff & Sons, Inc., First Federal Savings and Loan Association, Verex Assurance, Inc. v. Maduff Mortgage Corporation v. John Hanson Savings & Loan Association First City Federal Savings and Loan Association, Defendant-Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.