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.
7 Oregon opinions name it 1 courts 1986–2025 2 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. Bakergreen2 sentences2025Compare State v. Baker, 325 Or App 367, 370-71 , 528 P3d 812 (2023) (con- cluding that the error was not harmless because the evi- dence did not show how many bags of potting soil and potted plants were stolen or whether the items had price tags and that the value of those stolen items was not common knowl- edge), with Shedrick, 370 Or at 271-72 (explaining that the error was harmless because “[j]urors with common knowl- edge about ATMs * * * and about the interests of a bar owner in maintaining the cash levels in the ATM for customers to use it, would have understood that the circumstances in 2025Compare State v. Baker, 325 Or App 367, 370-71 , 528 P3d 812 (2023) (con- cluding that the error was not harmless because the evi- dence did not show how many bags of potting soil and potted plants were stolen or whether the items had price tags and that the value of those stolen items was not common knowl- edge), with Shedrick, 370 Or at 271-72 (explaining that the error was harmless because “[j]urors with common knowl- edge about ATMs * * * and about the interests of a bar owner in maintaining the cash levels in the ATM for customers to use it, would have understood that the circumstances in | 2 | 2 |
State v. Shedrickgreen2 sentences2025Compare State v. Baker, 325 Or App 367, 370-71 , 528 P3d 812 (2023) (con- cluding that the error was not harmless because the evi- dence did not show how many bags of potting soil and potted plants were stolen or whether the items had price tags and that the value of those stolen items was not common knowl- edge), with Shedrick, 370 Or at 271-72 (explaining that the error was harmless because “[j]urors with common knowl- edge about ATMs * * * and about the interests of a bar owner in maintaining the cash levels in the ATM for customers to use it, would have understood that the circumstances in 2025Compare State v. Baker, 325 Or App 367, 370-71 , 528 P3d 812 (2023) (con- cluding that the error was not harmless because the evi- dence did not show how many bags of potting soil and potted plants were stolen or whether the items had price tags and that the value of those stolen items was not common knowl- edge), with Shedrick, 370 Or at 271-72 (explaining that the error was harmless because “[j]urors with common knowl- edge about ATMs * * * and about the interests of a bar owner in maintaining the cash levels in the ATM for customers to use it, would have understood that the circumstances in | 2 | 2 |
In re the Marriage of Gomezgreen1 sentence2016Id.; see also Gomez, 261 Or App at 638 (vacating and remanding custody award because trial court “failed to balance that preference against the other factors set forth in ORS 107.137(1)”). | 1 | 1 |
In Re the Marriage of Fedorovgreen2 sentences2011In that case, we agreed with the father that the custodial parent, the mother, did not have a presumptive right to relocate with the child, and the mother’s move had to satisfy the best interests standard. 228 Or App at 61-62 . 2011The evidence demonstrated the strength of the relationships between the child and each parent, and we agreed with the trial court’s findings that the father had “taken virtually all opportunities to be with his child when he [wa]s able to do so” and that “the geographical distance involved in a move to Australia * * * would make unrealistic any frequent contact between father and the child.” Id. at 59 (internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Kitzmiller
neutral
2 sentences2025In sum, although a jury could find that defendant acted with criminal negligence with respect to the value of the damaged property, the jury also might not have been persuaded that defendant was aware that there was a sub- stantial and unjustifiable risk that shooting toward a ply- wood structure at a shooting range with bullet holes in it would result in more than $500 worth of damage and that Cite as 337 Or App 552 (2025) 557 defendant’s failure to be aware of that risk was a gross devi- ation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in that situation. 2025In sum, although a jury could find that defendant acted with criminal negligence with respect to the value of the damaged property, the jury also might not have been persuaded that defendant was aware that there was a sub- stantial and unjustifiable risk that shooting toward a ply- wood structure at a shooting range with bullet holes in it would result in more than $500 worth of damage and that Cite as 337 Or App 552 (2025) 557 defendant’s failure to be aware of that risk was a gross devi- ation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in that situation. | 2 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Smith
green
1 sentence2020So too will the trial judge have a conflict, having already heard the evidence.” Id. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Doherty v. Wizner
green
2 sentences2014As we explained in Doherty, although the historical basis for such an unnamed presumption is beyond dispute, in Oregon and elsewhere the best interests standard has evolved toward a “more gender-neutral and child-centered inquiry.” Id. at 322-24 . 2014Further, “[i]t is well-established law today that neither parent has a superior right in determining the child’s last name.” Id. at 322 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Fare v. Michael C.
green
1 sentence1986If it were otherwise, a juvenile’s request for almost anyone he considered trustworthy enough to give him reliable advice would trigger the rigid rule of Miranda.” 442 US at 722-23 . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
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.