City of Hermiston v. Reigle, 274 P.3d 184 (Or. 2012).

City of Hermiston v. Reigle, 274 P.3d 184 (Or. 2012). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite

green Positive treatment Quoted verbatim 2× 11.6 score

G Cite

cited 2× by 1 distinct case · …where the statute defining a crime does 91 not expressly identify who qualifies as a 'victim,' the court examines the statute to identify the gravamen of the crime and determine whom the legislature intended to directly protect by way of the criminal proscription. ⚠ not in text

69 citation events (69 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.

Strongest positive: State v. Crow (orctapp, 2018-09-12)

Treatment trajectory · 2012 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of

2012 2019 2026

Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗

examined Cited as authority (quoted) State v. Crow (2×)

Or. Ct. App. · 2018 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence low

where the statute defining a crime does 91 not expressly identify who qualifies as a 'victim,' the court examines the statute to identify the gravamen of the crime and determine whom the legislature intended to directly protect by way of the criminal proscription.

discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Landis v. Limbaugh

Or. Ct. App. · 2016 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low

easements and dedications both implicate the transfer of a property interest.

discussed Cited "see" State v. Vasquez-Reyes

Or. Ct. App. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high

See State v. Phillips, 245 Or App 38, 46 , 261 P3d 55 (2011), rev den, 351 Or 545 (2012) (affirming the denial of a motion to admit certain evidence as bias evidence, because “reasonable inferences are permissible but speculation is not[,]” and “the string of inferences defendant would have us unwind is simply too long”) (internal quotation marks omitted); see generally State v. Bivins, 191 Or App 460, 468 , 83 P3d 379 (2004) (factfinders are not permitted to make inferences that require “too great an inferential leap” or the “stacking of inferences to the point of speculation”…

discussed Cited "see" State v. Zielinski

Or. Ct. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high

See State v. Phillips, 245 Or App 38, 46 , 261 P3d 55 (2011), rev den, 351 Or 545 (2012) (reasoning that to show the bias of a witness, rea- sonable inferences are permissible, but speculation is not).

discussed Cited "see" State v. Davis

Or. Ct. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high

See State v. Phillips, 245 Or App 38, 46 , 261 P3d 55 (2011), rev den, 351 Or 545 (2012) (stating that “reason- able inferences are permissible but ‘speculation * * * is not’ ” (quoting State v. Harberts, 198 Or App 546, 561 , 108 P3d 1201 (2005), rev den, 341 Or 80 (2006)) (ellipsis in Phillips). 798 State v. Davis The use-of-force policy was relevant to show the bias of G4S witnesses and generally undermine the credi- bility of their testimony at trial.

discussed Cited "see" State v. Reeves

Or. Ct. App. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high

See State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160, 171-72 , 206 P3d 1042 (2009) (after considering text and context, court considers any pertinent legislative history, giving it appropriate weight).” We reiterated that inquiry, with some refinement, in State v. Moncada, 241 Or App 202, 212 , 250 P3d 31 (2011), rev den, 351 Or 545 (2012), explaining that, “[w]here the statute defining a crime does not expressly identify the person who qualifies as a ‘victim,’ the court examines the statute to identify the gravamen of the crime and determine the class of persons whom the legislature intended to directly p…