Legal Opinion
State v. Counts
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided August 1, 1991No. CC C88-08-35588; CA A60040; SC S37272PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*618VAN HOOMISSEN, J.
The issue in this criminal case is whether the affirmative defense of mental disease or defect, ORS 161.295(1),1 and the affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance, ORS 163.135(1),2 are mutually exclusive.3 The trial court ruled that the defenses are mutually exclusive. The Court of Appeals affirmed. State v. Counts, 101 Or App 439, 790 P2d 1209 (1990). We hold that the defenses are not mutually exclusive and, therefore, we reverse.
Defendant waived his right to a jury trial and the court tried this case on stipulated facts. Defendant took a gun from his closet and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Patterson v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Leland v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- People v. PattersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- State v. OlmsteadOregon Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. OttOregon Supreme Court · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- James E. Griffin, Jr. v. Dan Johnson, Superintendent, Snake River Correctional InstitutionCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- State v. GileCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
- Smith v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- State v. WilleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- State v. ZielinskiCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.