Legal Opinion

Howe v. Cupp

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 21, 1981No. 113752 CA A20299PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoomissen, J.

Defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree, and on appeal his conviction was affirmed. State v. Howe, 32 Or App 178, 573 P2d 780 (1978). 1 He petitioned for post-conviction relief, alleging multiple claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. The post-conviction court concluded that, while no single claim of defendant warranted a new trial, 2 the cumulative effect of the trial’s numerous shortcomings was to deny defendant a fair trial. 3 It granted defendant’s petition and ordered a new trial. The state appeals. ORS 138.650. We reverse.

ORS…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Krummacher v. GierloffOregon Supreme Court · 1981
  4. Rook v. CuppCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1974
  5. Miotke v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Yeager v. MaassCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
  2. State v. HuffmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  3. Pinnell v. PalmateerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  4. State v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  5. Johnson v. MaassCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API