Legal Opinion

State v. Long

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 1994No. CC 33681; CA A74762; SC S41205PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoomissen, J.

Defendant appeals his conviction of sodomy in the first degree, former ORS 163.405. He contends that the trial court erred by “allowing the state to amend at trial a material allegation of the indictment” and by “offering an instruction that amounted to an amendment to a material element of the indictment.” The Court of Appeals held that the amendment to the indictment did not in any way alter the substantive decision of the grand jury, but was instead simply a permissible amendment as to a defect in form resulting from a scrivener’s error, and affirmed. State v. Long, 126 Or App 126, 868 P2d…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. MilbradtOregon Supreme Court · 1988
  2. State v. WimberOregon Supreme Court · 1992
  3. State v. HowardOregon Supreme Court · 1958
  4. State v. WoodsonOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  5. State v. BostOregon Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. State v. ReedWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1999
  2. State v. PachmayrOregon Supreme Court · 2008
  3. State v. HajiOregon Supreme Court · 2020
  4. State v. NewmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  5. State v. BurnettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002

28 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