Legal Opinion · Dissent

State Ex Rel. Russell v. Jones

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1982No. SC 28198Published

1DissentCampbell, J.

I would hold that defendants in criminal prosecutions do not have an absolute right under Article I, section 11 of the Oregon Constitution or the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution to have a lawyer present at their presentence interviews. I would also note that as a matter of due process the sentencing judge in his sound discretion may be required to allow a defendant in a particular case the right to have his attorney present at the interview. This is not such a case.

It is my opinion that the Article I, section 11 and Sixth Amendment problem should be resolved by “weighing or…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. State Ex Rel. Ricco v. BiggsOregon Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Buchea v. SullivanOregon Supreme Court · 1972
  4. State Ex Rel. Johnson v. RichardsonOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  5. State ex rel. Ott v. CushingOregon Supreme Court · 1980

1 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