Legal Opinion
City of Portland v. Chicharro
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided August 10, 1981No. DA 191180-8004, CA 18497PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWarden, J.
Defendant appeals his conviction for disobeying a police officer at an assembly, arguing that the ordinance under which he was charged, Section 14.24.100 of the Code of the City of Portland, is unconstitutional because of vagueness, overbreadth and failure to prescribe a culpable mental state, and because it makes the exercise of the constitutionally guaranteed right to assemble a crime based on the act of another.
The police were dispatched to a party at a Portland residence. Upon arriving, they contacted two persons who claimed to be the son and daughter of the owners of the house and who…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cantwell v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Cox v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Edwards v. South CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Feiner v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Ashton v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of Portland v. GatewoodCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
- City of Portland v. HemstreetCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- McNutt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982