State v. Burleson
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, C. J.
In this mandamus proceeding, we consider whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion to hold a grand jury witness (witness) in remedial contempt for refusing to identify the victims of an alleged crime. In denying the contempt motion, the trial court also implicitly denied the state’s motion to compel the witness to identify the victims or to produce documents that would identify them. We conclude that the trial court correctly denied the contempt motion, but should have granted the motion to compel production of full and unredacted medical records in the possession of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. GortmakerOregon Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. ThreetOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- State Ex Rel. Keisling v. NorbladOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- In re Marriage of BarrettOregon Supreme Court · 1994
- Sexson v. MertenOregon Supreme Court · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Lindell v. KaluginOregon Supreme Court · 2013
- State v. PachmayrOregon Supreme Court · 2008
- Doe v. Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day SaintsOregon Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. SparksCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
- State v. KuznetsovOregon Supreme Court · 2008
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.