Legal Opinion

State v. Sewell

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 14, 2009No. 050036CM; A133727PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

The state petitions for reconsideration of our decision in State v. Sewell, 222 Or App 423, 193 P3d 1046 (2008). In our original opinion, we agreed with the state and accepted its concession that the trial court had erred in failing to engage in the four-step analysis of the admissibility of evidence under OEC 403, as described in State v. Mayfield, 302 Or 631, 645, 733 P2d 438 (1987). We then rejected the state’s argument that the trial court’s error was harmless. Sewell, 222 Or App at 430. We concluded with the following disposition: “Reversed and remanded.” For the first time on…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. MayfieldOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. State v. SewellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. State v. HardmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. SewellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  2. State v. LevasseurCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  3. State v. MartineauCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  4. State v. Henderson-LairdCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  5. State v. GarciaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018

4 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