margin error in Oregon

2025Co. v. Bair, 437 US 267 , 271 n 4, 98 S Ct 2340 , 57 L Ed 2d 197 (1978) (upholding state’s income apportionment formula based solely on in-state sales despite resulting increase in tax base of approximately 48 percent); Container Corp., 463 US at 184 (upholding income apportionment methodology where “the percentage increase in taxable income attributable to California between the methodology employed by appellant and the methodology employed by appellee comes to approximately 14%, a far cry from the more than 250% difference which led us to strike down the state tax in Hans Rees’ Sons, Inc., a

2025Co. v. Bair, 437 US 267 , 271 n 4, 98 S Ct 2340 , 57 L Ed 2d 197 (1978) (upholding state’s income apportionment formula based solely on in-state sales despite resulting increase in tax base of approximately 48 percent); Container Corp., 463 US at 184 (upholding income apportionment methodology where “the percentage increase in taxable income attributable to California between the methodology employed by appellant and the methodology employed by appellee comes to approximately 14%, a far cry from the more than 250% difference which led us to strike down the state tax in Hans Rees’ Sons, Inc., a

2015The Supreme Court held that, when a defendant has an IQ score between 70 and 75, the defendant’s lawyers must be allowed to offer addi- tional clinical evidence of intellectual deficit, including the inability to learn basic skills and adapt to changing circum- stances. 134 S Ct at 2001 .

2015The Supreme Court held that, when a defendant has an IQ score between 70 and 75, the defendant’s lawyers must be allowed to offer additional clinical evidence of intellectual deficit, including the inability to learn basic skills and adapt to changing circumstances. 134 S Ct at 2001 .

2002Because the action for injunctive relief was filed first, we refer to the Olsons as plaintiffs and to Van Horn as defendant. 2 A map is included in the Appendix to this opinion. 3 The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus five feet. 4 In Tipperman , the Supreme Court did not refer to ORS 42.220, which provides that, “[i]n construing an instrument, the circumstances under which it was made, including the situation of the subject and of the parties, may be shown so that the judge is placed in the position of those whose language the judge is *271 interpreting.” Nor did the court refer to

2002Because the action for injunctive relief was filed first, we refer to the Olsons as plaintiffs and to Van Horn as defendant. 2 A map is included in the Appendix to this opinion. 3 The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus five feet. 4 In Tipperman , the Supreme Court did not refer to ORS 42.220, which provides that, “[i]n construing an instrument, the circumstances under which it was made, including the situation of the subject and of the parties, may be shown so that the judge is placed in the position of those whose language the judge is *271 interpreting.” Nor did the court refer to

1993The phenomenon normally occurs for a few seconds, but in alcohol-induced nystagmus, the condition will continue over an extended period, and the movements will be larger and are easy to distinguish. [6] The rule has since been amended to provide that the officer shall check for the onset of nystagmus "prior to 45 degrees in each eye." [7] According to Burns, the National Highway Traffic Safety Association uses this test nationally, and about one-half of the states have adopted the field sobriety test battery that includes the HGN test. [8] The court found that, although the HGN test satisfied