green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
11.9 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases ·
…a law may be so over- inclusive or underinclusive that no rational relationship can be detected.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 28 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev.
a law may be so over- inclusive or underinclusive that no rational relationship can be detected.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Dept. of Rev.
a law may be so over- inclusive or underinclusive that no rational relationship can be detected.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Woodroffe v. Board of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision
laws involving classifications created by statute 'are entitled to no special protection and, in fact, are not even considered to be classes for the purposes of article i, section 20.' sealey v. hicks, 309 or 387, 397 , 788 p2d 435 , cert den, 498 us 819 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Logston
See State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 605 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (holding that Measure 11 did not repeal the sentencing guidelines by implication because they “can be harmonized to give effect to both”); State ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Logston
See State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 605 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (holding that Measure 11 did not repeal the sentencing guidelines by implication because they “can be harmonized to give effect to both”); State ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Covell
See generally State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 615 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (discussing the “inherent sentencing power of the courts” in relation to the role of the legislature in setting periods of imprisonment).
discussed
Cited "see"
J. M. v. Or. Youth Auth.
See State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer , 324 Or. 597 , 620, 932 P.2d 1145 , cert. den. , 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997) (On "a question of federal law, we are bound by the pertinent decisions of the United States Supreme *407 Court.").
cited
Cited "see"
Haley v. State
See 158 S.W.3d at 516 . . 939 S.W.2d 627, 637 (Tex.Crim.App.1996), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Cervantes Salazar v. Dretke
See Cantu v. State, 939 S.W.2d 627, 636 (Tex.Crim.App.1997)(holding admissible at a capital murder trial evidence regarding the gang rape and murder of the companion of the victim named in the indictment where both young women were murdered in the course of the same criminal transaction), ce rt. denied, 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997); Nelson v. State, 864 S.W.2d 496, 498-99 (Tex.Crim.App.1993)(holding admissible evidence showing a second woman was also sexually assaulted and stabbed in the course of the sexual assault and murder of the victim named in the indictment), ce…
cited
Cited "see"
Karnes v. State
See Cantu v. State, 939 S.W.2d 627, 637 (Tex.Crim.App.), ce rt. denied, 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Dilts
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See id., 147 L Ed 2d at 449 (consistent with due process, trial courts may “exercise discretion — taking into consideration various factors relating both to offense and offender — in imposing a [sentence] within the range prescribed by statute”) (emphasis in original). 6 Defendant nevertheless contends that the departure factor at issue in this case — that the offense was motivated in part by the victim’s race or color — is qualitatively the same as the biased-motive sentence-enhancement factor applied in Apprendi and that, consistent with the Supreme Court’s view of such a fac…
discussed
Cited "see"
City of Portland v. Cook
See State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 617 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den 522 US 994 (1997) (separation of powers may be violated when “one branch of government has unduly burdened the actions of another”). 5 Amicus Multnomah County Bar Association raises a related but separate issue.
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilson v. State
See Boston v.. State, 965 S.W.2d 546, 550 (Tex.App. — Houston [14th Dist.] 1997, pet. ref' d) (citing Cantu v. State, 939 S.W.2d 627, 687 (Tex.Crim.App.1997) (victim impact testimony for extraneous offense not admissible in punishment phase of capital murder case), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1998)).
cited
Cited "see"
Falken v. Glynn County, Georgia
See Christian v. City of Gladstone, 108 F.3d 929 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997).
cited
Cited "see"
Boelter v. City of Coon Rapids
See Christian v. City of Gladstone, 108 F.3d 929 , 931 (8th Cir. 1997) (providing background on § 207(k)), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lee
Considering that generally, repeal by implication is disfa- vored, the court ultimately concluded that “the legislature is free to provide avenues for exclusion, either explicitly or implicitly, for some statutes, and not for others.” Lee, 371 Or at 218 ; see also State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 604-05 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (explaining that repeal by implication is disfavored); State ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lee
Considering that generally, repeal by implication is disfa- vored, the court ultimately concluded that “the legislature is free to provide avenues for exclusion, either explicitly or implicitly, for some statutes, and not for others.” Lee, 371 Or at 218 ; see also State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 604-05 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (explaining that repeal by implication is disfavored); State ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Lee
Considering that generally, repeal by implication is disfa- vored, the court ultimately concluded that “the legislature is free to provide avenues for exclusion, either explicitly or implicitly, for some statutes, and not for others.” Lee, 371 Or at 218 ; see also State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 604-05 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (explaining that repeal by implication is disfavored); State ex rel.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Garcia White v. Rick Thaler, Director
Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262, 271 , 96 S.Ct. 2950 , 49 L.Ed.2d 929 (1976); Sonnier v. Quarterman, 476 F.3d 349, 366-67 (5th Cir.2007); see also Beazley v. Johnson, 242 F.3d 248, 260 (5th Cir.2001) (“[Texas’s] statutory scheme has not radically changed from the version upheld in Jurek v. Texas, except to incorporate the dictates of Penry.” (alterations and emphases omitted) (quoting Cantu v. State, 939 S.W.2d 627, 645 (Tex.Crim.App.-en banc 1997), cert. denied 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997))).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Pete's Mountain Homeowners Ass'n v. Clackamas County
See, e.g., State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 604 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (“ Tf earlier and later statutes are in irreconcilable conflict, then the earlier must yield to the later by implied repeal.’ ” (Quoting Anthony et al. v. Veatch et al., 189 Or 462, 481 , 220 P2d 493 (1950).)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cullop v. Offender Information & Sentence Computation Center
See, e.g., State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (mandamus *173 remedy was available to require judge who had imposed unlawful sentence to impose lawful sentence).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Vedder
Anthony et al. v. Veatch et al., 189 Or 462, 481 , 220 P2d 493 , 221 P2d 575 (1950); see also State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 604-05 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (describing doctrine but concluding that it was inapposite because the sentencing guidelines and 1994 Ballot Measure 11 were not in “plain, unavoidable and irreconcilable” conflict).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Larsen v. Board of Parole
See, e.g., State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or. 597, 604 , 932 P.2d 1145 , cert. den., 522 U.S. 994 , 118 S.Ct. 557 , 139 L.Ed.2d 399 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Kinkel
See, e.g., State v. Rhodes, 149 Or App 118, 122 , 941 P2d 1072 (1997), rev den, 326 Or 390 (1998) (questioning whether Article I, section 15, can provide the basis for an “as-applied” challenge to a sentence); see also State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 613 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den, 522 US 994 (1997) (prior case law does not suggest “that the choice of a sentence must differ from criminal to criminal because of Article I, section 15”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
DeMendoza v. Huffman
See, e.g., State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 614 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den 522 US 994 (1997) (mandatory minimum sentences do not violate separation of powers); State ex rel Ray Wells, Inc. v. Hargreaves, 306 Or 610 , 615 n 2, 761 P2d 1306 (1988) (legislature did not perform judicial function when it enacted judge disqualification statutes); Nendel v. Meyers, 162 Or 661, 664 , 94 P2d 680 (1939) (statute requiring court to decide *455 motion for new trial within 55 days does not violate separation of powers).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Dugger v. Schiedler
See, e.g., State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den 522 US 994 (1997); State v. Lawler, 144 Or App 456 , 927 P2d 99 (1996), rev den 326 Or 390 (1998).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Moore
See, e.g., State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 604 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den 522 US 994 (1997); State ex rel Adams v. Powell, 171 Or App 81 , 15 P3d 54 (2000).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Hewitt
See, e.g., State ex rel Huddleston v. Sawyer, 324 Or 597, 600-08 , 932 P2d 1145 , cert den 522 US 994 (1997) (state could pursue mandamus remedy while also pursuing appeal, under circumstances where it was unclear whether the issue would be reviewable on appeal).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In re Tyler and Arteaga
v.
California
v.
California
No. 96-9413; No. 96-9513.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 1, 1997.
Published
Citer courts: Oregon Supreme Court (2) · Court of Appeals of Oregon (1)
C. A. 9th Cir. Motions of petitioners for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis [ante, p. 804] denied.