green
Positive treatment
Trending · 89 recent citers
9.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 2006 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2006
2016
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 14 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Coffelt
See State v. Cox, 337 Or 477, 500 , 98 P3d 1103 (2004), cert den, 546 US 830 (2005) (declining to exercise discretion to correct plain error and explaining that, had the defendant timely objected to wit- ness testimony at trial, “the state * * * could have chosen to forego the testimony and avoid the issue”); see also State v. Harrison, 267 Or App 571, 577 , 340 P3d 777 (2014), rev den, 357 Or 164 (2015) (explaining that, where there was “a rea- sonable dispute as to whether [the witness] impermissibly vouched for” the alleged child victim, “the trial court did not plainly err by not…
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Naudain
See State v. Cox, 337 Or 477, 487 , 98 P3d 1103 (2004), cert den, 546 US 830 (2005) (affirming exclusion of evidence under OEC 403 where the trial court explained, among other things, that evidence about defendant’s acts towards persons who were not the victim created potential for mini-trials about those acts); see also Lyons, 324 Or at 279 (discussing under OEC 702 that presentation of PCR-based DNA evidence did not risk confusion of the issues where it was not overly complex to explain, only two competing experts testified, and the tes- timony comprised less than 200 pages of transcript).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Lowery
See State v. Sanders, 317 N.C. 602, 608 , 346 S.E.2d 451, 456 (1986) (stating that the “statutory method for preserving a defendant’s right to seek appellate relief when a trial court refuses to allow a challenge for cause is mandatory and is the only method by which such rulings may be preserved for appellate review”); accord State v. Morgan, 359 N.C. 131, 148 , 604 S.E.2d 886, 896-97 (2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 830 , 163 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Schmitz v. SANSERI
See State v. Cox, 337 Or 477, 487 , 98 P3d 1103 (2004), cert den, 546 US 830 (2005) (trial court did not err in excluding evidence of victim’s violent acts towards others to show defendant’s reasons for fearing victim, because evidence, although relevant, “would not have added greatly to the evidence already before the jury”).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Freitas
See State v. Cox, 337 Or 477, 500-01 , 98 P3d 1103 (2004), cert den, 546 US 830 (2005) (declining to exercise discretion to review unpreserved error where state’s case would not have changed had defendant raised a timely objection).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Lane
Ed. 2d 649, 661 (1987); see State v. Morgan, 359 N.C. 131, 154 , 604 S.E.2d 886, 900 (2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 830 , 163 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Fish
See State v. Cox, 337 Or 477, 487 , 98 P3d 1103 (2004), cert den, 546 US 830 (2005) (trial court did not err in excluding evidence of victim’s violent acts towards others to show defendant’s reasons for fearing victim, because evidence, although relevant, ‘would not have added greatly to the evidence already before the jury’).” Haugen, 349 Or at 193 (brackets in original). 4 OEC 404(3) provides: “Evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that the person acted inconformity *11 therewith.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Haugen
(2×)
See State v. Cox, 337 Or. 477, 487 , 98 P.3d 1103 (2004), cert. den., 546 U.S. 830 , 126 S.Ct. 50 , 163 L.Ed.2d 81 (2005) (trial court did not err in excluding evidence of victim's violent acts towards others to show defendant's reasons for fearing victim, because evidence, although relevant, "would not have added greatly to the evidence already before the jury").
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Cummings
(2×)
See State v. Morgan, 359 N.C. 131, 148-50 , 604 S.E.2d 886, 897 (2004), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 830 , 126 S.Ct. 47 , 163 L.Ed.2d 79 (2005).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Gayman
See, e.g., State v. Cox, 337 Or 477, 498-99 , 98 P3d 1103 (2004), cert den, 546 US 830 (2005) (rejecting a plain-error argument in a death penalty case on automatic and direct review); McDonnell v. Premo, 309 Or App 173 , 196 n 12, 483 P3d 640 (2021) (rejecting plain-error arguments in a death penalty case on collateral review).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Rubio
See, e.g., State v. Cox, 337 Or 477, 486 , 98 P3d 1103 (2004), cert den, 546 US 830 (2005) (trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding under OEC 403 evidence of a victim’s violent acts that was relevant to prove that the defendant feared the victim, but that provided only a “weak inference” that the defendant even knew of the victim’s violent acts); State v. Holterman, 69 Or App 509, 515-16 , 687 P2d 1097 , rev den, 298 Or 172 (1984) (court properly excluded as confusing to the jury speculative circumstantial evidence that the defendant wanted to present in order to support …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Maness
(2×)
Ed. 2d 640 (2003); see also State v. Thompson, 359 N.C. 77, 95 , 604 S.E.2d 850, 865 (2004) (finding difficulty in assessing whether a defendant’s willingness to plead guilty to first-degree murder in exchange for a sentence of life without parole had mitigating value in demonstrating an admission of the defendant’s responsibility), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 830 , 163 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Taylor
See also State v. Thompson, 359 N.C. 77, 82-85, 130-31 , 604 S.E.2d 850, 857-59, 885-86 (2004) (holding death sentence not disproportionate when the defendant, in the course of robbing a Domino’s Pizza, fatally shot the store manager two times and set fire to the building to cover up his crime), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 830 (2005); State v. Larry, 345 N.C. 497, 507, 534 , 481 S.E.2d 907, 913, 929 (holding death sentence not disproportionate when the defendant, after pointing a gun at a Food Lion employee and taking money from the safe, fatally shot a store customer who was also an off-duty pol…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Badgett
Accordingly, as in prior cases involving a capital defendant’s unwaivable right to presence, “[w]e will not assume error ‘when none appears on the record.’ ” Id. at 517, 459 S.E.2d at 762 (quoting State v. Williams, 274 N.C. 328, 333 , 163 S.E.2d 353, 357 (1968)); see also State v. Thompson, 359 N.C. 77, 114 , 604 S.E.2d 850, 876 (2004) (refusing to recognize violation of right to presence “unless and until defendant demonstrates constitutional error on the record”), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 830 (2005); State v. Adams, 335 N.C. 401, 410 , 439 S.E.2d 760, 764 (1994) (“[W]hatever i…
Morgan
v.
North Carolina
v.
North Carolina
No. 04-9885.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 3, 2005.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
Sup. Ct. N. C. Certiorari denied.