Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Washington

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 16, 1978No. C77-05-07402, CA 9520Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

BUTTLER, J.,

specially concurring in part and dissenting in part.

While I agree with the majority that this conviction must be reversed because of the Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Gilbert, 282 Or 309, 577 P2d 939 (1978), I do not agree with the majority’s reluctant compliance with that decision, and therefore specially concur in that portion of the opinion. With respect to the majority’s holding under the heading "$5,000 and the Picture,” I disagree, and because the evidentiary question remains important on retrial, I register my dissent.

First, the area of general agrément: Gilbert…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. ManriqueOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State v. HarrisonOregon Supreme Court · 1969
  3. State v. GilbertOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  4. State v. ManriqueCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1974
  5. State v. PruittCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API