Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Marks

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 19, 2017No. 120733023; A155465Published

1Concurrence

EDMONDS, S. J.,

concurring.

I write separately in this case to express my view that, under Article VII (Amended), section 3, of the Oregon Constitution, the majority’s harmless error analysis is improper. In this case, we hold that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s demurrer. I agree with that holding and it is dispositive; the majority’s harmless error analysis thereafter is unnecessary and is contrary to Article VII (Amended), section 3, for two reasons, developed more fully below. It follows, in my view, that remand for the trial to allow the demurrer is the proper disposition in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. DavisOregon Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. PostonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  3. State v. EberhardtCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API