Legal Opinion

State v. Hale

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 14, 1975No. C-74-11-3476PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchwab, C. J.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of rape. ORS 163.375. Defendant did not testify. His principal assignment of error is the trial court’s failure to give defendant’s requested instruction to the effect that failure of defendant to testify did not raise any presumption or inference of guilt. The state does not challenge the form of the requested instruction or the timeliness of the request, but contends only that Oregon law does not require such an instruction be given, on request by a defendant. The state argues that the following from State of Oregon v. Patton, 208 Or 610, 303 P2d 513…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. ManriqueOregon Supreme Court · 1975
  2. State of Oregon v. PattonOregon Supreme Court · 1956

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State v. SteeleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
  2. Hines v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1977
  3. State v. PiperArizona Supreme Court · 1976
  4. State v. LakesideOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  5. State v. DillonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976

6 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