Legal Opinion

State v. Miller

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 3, 2000No. 95c-22786; CA A99201PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

Defendant appeals several convictions for sexual offenses arising from the same incident. He assigns error to the court’s denial of his motion for a new trial based on alleged juror misconduct and to the action of a disqualified judge in hearing that motion. We hold that any juror misconduct does not justify setting aside the verdict and that defendant failed to preserve the disqualification issue and there is no reason for us to review it as plain error. We therefore affirm.

Shortly after the trial, Hearn, the jury foreperson, got in touch with defendant’s trial attorney and expressed concern…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ertsgaard v. BeardOregon Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  3. Ertsgaard v. BeardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. People v. ArnoldNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
  2. Meyer v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2003
  3. State v. VoghCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
  4. State v. CheneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  5. Meyer v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 2003

2 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