14 Oregon opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2026 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Deckard v. Bunchgreen2 sentences2025See Deckard v. Bunch, 358 Or 754 , 761 n 6, 370 P3d 478 (2016) (explaining that, “[w]hen a negligence claim other- wise exists, and a statute or rule defines the standard of care expected of a reasonably prudent person under the cir- cumstances,” the statute or rule controls whether the person was negligent). 2025See Deckard v. Bunch, 358 Or 754 , 761 n 6, 370 P3d 478 (2016) (explaining that, “[w]hen a negligence claim other- wise exists, and a statute or rule defines the standard of care expected of a reasonably prudent person under the cir- cumstances,” the statute or rule controls whether the person was negligent). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Carlsongreen2 sentences1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes 1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes | 2 | 2 |
State v. Jacksongreen1 sentence2019In Jackson, the court explained that “both the statute and Article I, section 12 embody the common-law rule that confessions made by a defendant in custody that were induced by the influence of hope or fear, applied by a public officer having the prisoner in his charge, are inadmissible against the defendant.” 364 Or at 21 (internal quotation marks omitted); see State v. Powell, 352 Or 210, 218 , 282 P3d 845 (2012) (“the statute encompasses the common law and thus applies to confes- sions induced by promises of leniency as well as by threats”); State v. Wintzingerode, 9 Or 153, 163 (1881) (“Th | 1 | 1 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences2019In Jackson, the court explained that “both the statute and Article I, section 12 embody the common-law rule that confessions made by a defendant in custody that were induced by the influence of hope or fear, applied by a public officer having the prisoner in his charge, are inadmissible against the defendant.” 364 Or at 21 (internal quotation marks omitted); see State v. Powell, 352 Or 210, 218 , 282 P3d 845 (2012) (“the statute encompasses the common law and thus applies to confes- sions induced by promises of leniency as well as by threats”); State v. Wintzingerode, 9 Or 153, 163 (1881) (“Th 2019In Jackson, the court explained that “both the statute and Article I, section 12 embody the common-law rule that confessions made by a defendant in custody that were induced by the influence of hope or fear, applied by a public officer having the prisoner in his charge, are inadmissible against the defendant.” 364 Or at 21 (internal quotation marks omitted); see State v. Powell, 352 Or 210, 218 , 282 P3d 845 (2012) (“the statute encompasses the common law and thus applies to confes- sions induced by promises of leniency as well as by threats”); State v. Wintzingerode, 9 Or 153, 163 (1881) (“Th | 1 | 1 |
State v. Powellgreen2 sentences2019In Jackson, the court explained that “both the statute and Article I, section 12 embody the common-law rule that confessions made by a defendant in custody that were induced by the influence of hope or fear, applied by a public officer having the prisoner in his charge, are inadmissible against the defendant.” 364 Or at 21 (internal quotation marks omitted); see State v. Powell, 352 Or 210, 218 , 282 P3d 845 (2012) (“the statute encompasses the common law and thus applies to confes- sions induced by promises of leniency as well as by threats”); State v. Wintzingerode, 9 Or 153, 163 (1881) (“Th 2019In Jackson, the court explained that “both the statute and Article I, section 12 embody the common-law rule that confessions made by a defendant in custody that were induced by the influence of hope or fear, applied by a public officer having the prisoner in his charge, are inadmissible against the defendant.” 364 Or at 21 (internal quotation marks omitted); see State v. Powell, 352 Or 210, 218 , 282 P3d 845 (2012) (“the statute encompasses the common law and thus applies to confes- sions induced by promises of leniency as well as by threats”); State v. Wintzingerode, 9 Or 153, 163 (1881) (“Th | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wintzingerodegreen1 sentence2019In Jackson, the court explained that “both the statute and Article I, section 12 embody the common-law rule that confessions made by a defendant in custody that were induced by the influence of hope or fear, applied by a public officer having the prisoner in his charge, are inadmissible against the defendant.” 364 Or at 21 (internal quotation marks omitted); see State v. Powell, 352 Or 210, 218 , 282 P3d 845 (2012) (“the statute encompasses the common law and thus applies to confes- sions induced by promises of leniency as well as by threats”); State v. Wintzingerode, 9 Or 153, 163 (1881) (“Th | 1 | 1 |
State v. Pinnellgreen2 sentences1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes 1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes | 1 | 1 |
State v. Johnsongreen2 sentences1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes 1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes | 1 | 1 |
Hefty v. Comprehensive Care Corporationgreen2 sentences1990See Hefty v. Comprehensive Care Corp., 307 Or 247, 252 , 766 P2d 1026 (1988); Cain v. Rijken, 300 Or 706 , 717 P2d 140 (1986). 1990See Hefty v. Comprehensive Care Corp., 307 Or 247, 252 , 766 P2d 1026 (1988); Cain v. Rijken, 300 Or 706 , 717 P2d 140 (1986). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc.red2 sentences2023In Horton, the court explained that, contrary to its previous conclusion in Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc., 332 Or 83 , 23 P3d 333 (2001) overruled by Horton, 359 Or at 218 , Article I, sec- tion 10, does not “lock[ ] courts and the legislature into a static conception of the common law as it existed in 1857.” Horton, 359 Or at 218-19 . 2023In Horton, the court explained that, contrary to its previous conclusion in Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc., 332 Or 83 , 23 P3d 333 (2001) overruled by Horton, 359 Or at 218 , Article I, sec- tion 10, does not “lock[ ] courts and the legislature into a static conception of the common law as it existed in 1857.” Horton, 359 Or at 218-19 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Althouse
green
2 sentences2018In Althouse , the court revisited ORS 137.719(1), but having set out the Rodriguez/Buck factors, reworked the framework for applying those factors to a recidivism statute and affirmed the defendant's true-life sentence for felony public indecency. 359 Or. at 684 , 375 P.3d 475 . 2018In Althouse , the court revisited ORS 137.719(1), but having set out the Rodriguez/Buck factors, reworked the framework for applying those factors to a recidivism statute and affirmed the defendant's true-life sentence for felony public indecency. 359 Or. at 684 , 375 P.3d 475 . | 2 | 2016–2018 |
Busch v. McInnis Waste Systems, Inc.
green
1 sentence2026Id. at 639-40 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Horton v. Oregon Health & Science University
green
2 sentences2023In Horton, the court explained that, contrary to its previous conclusion in Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc., 332 Or 83 , 23 P3d 333 (2001) overruled by Horton, 359 Or at 218 , Article I, sec- tion 10, does not “lock[ ] courts and the legislature into a static conception of the common law as it existed in 1857.” Horton, 359 Or at 218-19 . 2023In Horton, the court explained that, contrary to its previous conclusion in Smothers v. Gresham Transfer, Inc., 332 Or 83 , 23 P3d 333 (2001) overruled by Horton, 359 Or at 218 , Article I, sec- tion 10, does not “lock[ ] courts and the legislature into a static conception of the common law as it existed in 1857.” Horton, 359 Or at 218-19 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Rodriguez/Buck
green
1 sentence2016We observed in that case that the framework for the analysis of an as-applied dis-proportionality challenge to a true-life sentence under ORS 137.719 requires consideration of the following factors: *382 ‘“(1) a comparison of the severity of the penalty and the gravity of the crime; (2) a comparison of the penalties imposed for other, related crimes; and (3) the criminal history of the defendant.’” Althouse, 359 Or at 684 (quoting Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or at 58 ). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Unger
green
1 sentence2015Under Unger , if unlawful police conduct occurred in this case, then the state must demonstrate that defendant’s voluntary consent was not the product of exploitation of that unlawful conduct. 356 Or at 74-75 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Hall
green
1 sentence2009The Supreme Court has described the framework for that analysis as follows: “After a defendant shows a minimal factual nexus between unlawful police conduct and the defendant’s consent, then the state has the burden to prove that the defendant’s consent was independent of, or only tenuously related to, the unlawful police conduct.” Id. at 34-35 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Edwards
green
2 sentences2005However, this appeal is not about whether counsel violated DR 5-101(A), and our role as an error-correcting court in a criminal case is fundamentally different from an ethics adjudication. *24 State v. Edwards, 132 Or App 590, 593 , 890 P2d 423 (1995), provides the framework for our analysis. 2005However, this appeal is not about whether counsel violated DR 5-101(A), and our role as an error-correcting court in a criminal case is fundamentally different from an ethics adjudication. *24 State v. Edwards, 132 Or App 590, 593 , 890 P2d 423 (1995), provides the framework for our analysis. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Ball v. Gladden
green
2 sentences1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes 1992Because there is evidence to support the trial court's findings, there was no error in admitting the other crimes evidence. [14] State v. Carlson, 311 Or. 201, 214, 217-19 , 808 P.2d 1002 (1991) (applying Ball v. Gladden, 250 Or. 485, 487 , 443 P.2d 621 (1968), to an OEC 104(1) determination by a trial court); State v. Pinnell, supra, 311 Or. at 109-11, 806 P.2d 110 (affirming the trial court's OEC 104(1) findings regarding the admissibility of other crimes evidence); see also State v. Johnson, 313 Or. 189, 195-97 , 832 P.2d 443 (1992) (setting forth the framework for analysis of other crimes | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Fuhrer v. Gearhart by the Sea, Inc.
green
2 sentences1990So, the framework for analysis is set out in Fuhrer v. Gearhart By The Sea, Inc., 306 Or 434, 438 , 760 P2d 874 (1988): “A defendant may be liable if the defendant can reasonably foresee that there is an unreasonable risk of harm, a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would warn of the risk, the defendant has a reasonable chance to warn of the risk, the defendant does not warn of the risk, and the plaintiff is injured as a result of the failure to warn.” Defendant’s only arguments relating to the factors articulated in Führer are that the harm was not foreseeable and that its actions 1990So, the framework for analysis is set out in Fuhrer v. Gearhart By The Sea, Inc., 306 Or 434, 438 , 760 P2d 874 (1988): “A defendant may be liable if the defendant can reasonably foresee that there is an unreasonable risk of harm, a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would warn of the risk, the defendant has a reasonable chance to warn of the risk, the defendant does not warn of the risk, and the plaintiff is injured as a result of the failure to warn.” Defendant’s only arguments relating to the factors articulated in Führer are that the harm was not foreseeable and that its actions | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Cain v. Rijken
green
2 sentences1990See Hefty v. Comprehensive Care Corp., 307 Or 247, 252 , 766 P2d 1026 (1988); Cain v. Rijken, 300 Or 706 , 717 P2d 140 (1986). 1990See Hefty v. Comprehensive Care Corp., 307 Or 247, 252 , 766 P2d 1026 (1988); Cain v. Rijken, 300 Or 706 , 717 P2d 140 (1986). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
State v. Lehmann
green
2 sentences1982State v. Lehmann, 6 Or App 600 , 488 P2d 1383 (1971).” State v. Williams, 16 Or App 361 , 518 P2d 1049 , rev den (1974). 1982State v. Lehmann, 6 Or App 600 , 488 P2d 1383 (1971).” State v. Williams, 16 Or App 361 , 518 P2d 1049 , rev den (1974). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
State v. Williams
green
2 sentences1982State v. Lehmann, 6 Or App 600 , 488 P2d 1383 (1971).” State v. Williams, 16 Or App 361 , 518 P2d 1049 , rev den (1974). 1982State v. Lehmann, 6 Or App 600 , 488 P2d 1383 (1971).” State v. Williams, 16 Or App 361 , 518 P2d 1049 , rev den (1974). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.