Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Oregon opinions name it 1 courts 2010–2026 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oregon courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Rodriguez/Buckgreen2 sentences2024Blackstone, who urged more rational, *46 proportional sentences, argued that different standards should apply to repeat offenders. 4 William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 12, 15-16 (1769).” Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 65-66 . 2016In Rodriguez/Buck , the Supreme Court clarified the proper approach to the proportionality analysis pursuant to Article I, section 16. 347 Or at 56-67 . | 2 | 5 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . 2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Lara-Vasquezgreen2 sentences2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . 2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Wiesegreen2 sentences2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . 2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Wheelergreen2 sentences2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . 2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Alwingergreen2 sentences2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . 2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . | 2 | 2 |
State v. Delpgreen2 sentences2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . 2024See, e.g., Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 77 ; Wheeler, 343 Or at 673-74 ; Smith, 128 Or at 525 ; Lara-Vasquez, 310 Or App at 109 ; Delp, 297 Or App at 12 ; Wiese, 238 Or App at 429 ; Alwinger, 236 Or App at 247 . | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Althouse
green
2 sentences2024The first and third Rodriguez/Buck factors “ ‘overlap’ when determining proportionality under a recidivism statute.” Carey-Martin, 293 Or App at 618 -19 (quoting State v. Althouse, 359 Or 668, 685 , 375 P3d 475 (2016)). 2024The first and third Rodriguez/Buck factors “ ‘overlap’ when determining proportionality under a recidivism statute.” Carey-Martin, 293 Or App at 618 -19 (quoting State v. Althouse, 359 Or 668, 685 , 375 P3d 475 (2016)). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Carey-Martin
green
2 sentences2024The first and third Rodriguez/Buck factors “ ‘overlap’ when determining proportionality under a recidivism statute.” Carey-Martin, 293 Or App at 618 -19 (quoting State v. Althouse, 359 Or 668, 685 , 375 P3d 475 (2016)). 2024The first and third Rodriguez/Buck factors “ ‘overlap’ when determining proportionality under a recidivism statute.” Carey-Martin, 293 Or App at 618 -19 (quoting State v. Althouse, 359 Or 668, 685 , 375 P3d 475 (2016)). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Hernandez-Esteban
neutral
2 sentences2026As discussed at length in State v. Hernandez-Esteban, 330 Or App 34, 45-57 , 543 P3d 154 (2024), rev’d on other grounds, 374 Or 300 , 577 P3d 761 (2025), a review of existing case law suggests that “a defendant’s ‘criminal history’ is predominantly relevant to the proportionality analysis under Article I, section 16, as it pertains to incorrigibility and failure to deter.” Here, unfortunately, defendant’s criminal history suggests incorrigibility and a decided failure to deter.8 We emphasize that the only issue before us is whether defendant’s sentence is unconstitutional. 2026As discussed at length in State v. Hernandez-Esteban, 330 Or App 34, 45-57 , 543 P3d 154 (2024), rev’d on other grounds, 374 Or 300 , 577 P3d 761 (2025), a review of existing case law suggests that “a defendant’s ‘criminal history’ is predominantly relevant to the proportionality analysis under Article I, section 16, as it pertains to incorrigibility and failure to deter.” Here, unfortunately, defendant’s criminal history suggests incorrigibility and a decided failure to deter.8 We emphasize that the only issue before us is whether defendant’s sentence is unconstitutional. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Hernandez-Esteban
green
2 sentences2026As discussed at length in State v. Hernandez-Esteban, 330 Or App 34, 45-57 , 543 P3d 154 (2024), rev’d on other grounds, 374 Or 300 , 577 P3d 761 (2025), a review of existing case law suggests that “a defendant’s ‘criminal history’ is predominantly relevant to the proportionality analysis under Article I, section 16, as it pertains to incorrigibility and failure to deter.” Here, unfortunately, defendant’s criminal history suggests incorrigibility and a decided failure to deter.8 We emphasize that the only issue before us is whether defendant’s sentence is unconstitutional. 2026As discussed at length in State v. Hernandez-Esteban, 330 Or App 34, 45-57 , 543 P3d 154 (2024), rev’d on other grounds, 374 Or 300 , 577 P3d 761 (2025), a review of existing case law suggests that “a defendant’s ‘criminal history’ is predominantly relevant to the proportionality analysis under Article I, section 16, as it pertains to incorrigibility and failure to deter.” Here, unfortunately, defendant’s criminal history suggests incorrigibility and a decided failure to deter.8 We emphasize that the only issue before us is whether defendant’s sentence is unconstitutional. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. Allen
green
2 sentences2019App. at 313 , 432 P.3d 250 , and in doing so it should consider the effect that the disability, if credited, has on the offender's ability to understand the nature and consequences of his or her conduct and ability to conform his or her behavior to the law. 2019Therefore, when presented with the issue in making a proportionality analysis under Article I, section 16, and Rodriguez/Buck , a trial court must consider an offender's intellectual disability on the record, Allen , 294 Or. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Ryan
green
2 sentences2018Therefore, the court held, if presented with the issue, in making a proportionality analysis under Article I, section 16 and Rodriguez/Buck , "a sentencing court must consider a defendant's intellectual disability in comparing the gravity of a defendant's offense with the severity of a mandatory prison sentence on such an offender." Id. at 621 , 396 P.3d 867 . 2018Therefore, the court held, if presented with the issue, in making a proportionality analysis under Article I, section 16 and Rodriguez/Buck , "a sentencing court must consider a defendant's intellectual disability in comparing the gravity of a defendant's offense with the severity of a mandatory prison sentence on such an offender." Id. at 621 , 396 P.3d 867 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Wilson
green
2 sentences2016“The court adhered to the traditional proportionality test — that is, whether imposition of the sentence would shock the moral sense of reasonable people — and identified ‘at least three factors’ that bear upon that ‘ultimate conclusion.’” State v. Wilson, 243 Or App 464, 468 , 259 P3d 1004 (2011) (quoting Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 58 ). 2016“The court adhered to the traditional proportionality test — that is, whether imposition of the sentence would shock the moral sense of reasonable people — and identified ‘at least three factors’ that bear upon that ‘ultimate conclusion.’” State v. Wilson, 243 Or App 464, 468 , 259 P3d 1004 (2011) (quoting Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 58 ). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.