Legal Opinion

Sullivan v. Popoff

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 7, 2015No. 112039; A152080PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLagesen, P. J.

The question on appeal in this post-conviction case is whether, in deciding not to raise a hearsay objection to certain testimony at petitioner’s criminal trial, petitioner’s trial counsel failed to exercise reasonable professional skill and judgment and, if so, whether that failure prejudiced petitioner. We conclude, as did the post-conviction court, that trial counsel’s decision-making process, and his handling of the testimony that petitioner identifies as objectionable, was well within the range of reasonable approaches available to a lawyer in trial counsel’s position. Accordingly, we…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Green v. FrankeOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Montez v. CzerniakOregon Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Pereida-Alba v. CourseyOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  5. State v. SullivanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Davis v. CainCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  2. Heroff v. CourseyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  3. Curry v. HighbergerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
  4. Johnson v. MyrickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  5. Farmer v. PremoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017

7 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