Legal Opinion

State v. Cervantes

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 26, 1994No. CC 90CR2935; CA A68493; SC S40204PublishedCited by 114 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUnis, J.

Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right to a trial “in the county in which the offense shall have been committed. ’ ’ This venue requirement is a material allegation of the indictment that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Cooksey, 242 Or 250, 251, 409 P2d 335 (1965); State v. Jones, 240 Or 129, 130, 400 P2d 524 (1965). The issue in this criminal case is whether the state introduced sufficient evidence to establish venue beyond a reasonable doubt. We hold that it did.

After a jury trial, defendant was found guilty of rape in…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. KrummacherOregon Supreme Court · 1974
  2. State v. KingOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  3. State v. McDonnellOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  4. State v. MirandaOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State v. CookseyOregon Supreme Court · 1965

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

3Cited by114 opinions

  1. State v. WalkerOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Elizabeth Diane Downs v. Sonia HoytCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  3. State v. MillsOregon Supreme Court · 2013
  4. State v. D. R.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  5. State v. AmayaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001

109 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