State v. Vanornum
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1DissentSchuman, J.
At defendant’s trial for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest, the court refused to give an instruction that, under a subsequently decided Supreme Court case, was a correct statement of the law, and did give an instruction that, under the same Supreme Court case, was an incorrect statement of the law. Both instructions involved a disputed and potentially dispositive issue in the case. In other words, applying the law as it currently exists, State v. Jury, 185 Or App 132, 57 P3d 970 (2002), rev den, 335 Or 504 (2003), it is beyond dispute that defendant did not receive a fair trial. The…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. JuryCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- Hernandez v. Barbo MacHinery Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1998
- McCathern v. Toyota Motor Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 2001
- Wallach v. Allstate InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. OliphantOregon Supreme Court · 2009
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.