neutral
Cited (no substantive treatment)
published
0.3 score
Cited for
No citing cases on record.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE OF OREGON, on Review/Respondent on Review
v.
MINDI MARIE TUCKER, on Review/Petitioner on Review
v.
MINDI MARIE TUCKER, on Review/Petitioner on Review
TC 85-0025; CA A36725; SC S34368, S34604.
Oregon Supreme Court.
Feb 2, 1988.
Published opinion
Stephen F. Peifer, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the petition for review and Jonathan H. Fussner, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the supplemental petition for review on behalf of the petitioner State of Oregon. With them on the petitions were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem., Wayne Mackeson, Portland, filed the petition for review on behalf of the petitioner Mindi Marie Tucker. With him on the petition was Des Connall and Dan Lorenz, P.C., Portland.
Defendant, Jones, Oregon, Peterson, Petitions, Review, State.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
[*44] MEMORANDUM OPINION
The petitions for review of the State of Oregon and the defendant are denied. The supplemental petition for review of the State of Oregon is allowed. The decision of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the issue raised in the supplemental petition of the State of Oregon.
Peterson, C. J., and Jones, J., would have allowed review on the original petitions of the State of Oregon and defendant.