Legal Opinion

Maxfield v. Cain

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 3, 2019No. A163470PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.

*554This post-conviction case comes to us for a second time after we initially reversed and remanded the judgment denying petitioner relief. See Maxfield v. Nooth , 278 Or. App. 684, 377 P.3d 650 (2016). In this proceeding, petitioner argues, and the superintendent concedes, that the post-conviction court exceeded the scope of remand by revisiting the issue of whether trial counsel failed to exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment instead of addressing the issue of prejudice under the correct standard. For the reasons set out below, we agree with the parties that the post-conviction…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Green v. FrankeOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Lichau v. BaldwinOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Ashley v. HoytCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. Allen v. PremoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Vasilash v. CainCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  2. Dept. of Human Services v. M. P.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API