Legal Opinion

Gonzales v. Taylor

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 4, 2015No. CV120876; A154530PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLagesen, J.

Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition for post-conviction relief. The petition alleged three claims for relief: (1) that petitioner’s trial counsel was constitutionally inadequate and ineffective (Claim 1); (2) that petitioner’s appellate counsel was inadequate and ineffective (Claim 2); and (3) that errors by the trial court warranted post-conviction relief (Claim 3). Petitioner assigns error to the trial court’s denial of relief on Claim 1 and Claim 2. He also assigns error to the post-conviction court’s failure to enter judgment in the form required by ORS 138.640 (l),1…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Datt v. HillOregon Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Walker v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  3. Soderstrom v. PremoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  4. Dudrov v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  5. Myers v. BrockampCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dudrov v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  2. Fisher v. AngelozziCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  3. Himebaugh v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  4. Kulhavy v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API