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 2 courts 2007–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion
green
2 sentences2025Respondent filed a petition for reconsideration of our decision in State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 373 Or 816 , 572 P3d 1045 (2025), where we held that a trial court may grant presentence incarceration credit under ORS 137.370(4) for the 125 days that relator spent in custody after his arrest on outstanding warrants and before the Marion County Circuit Court revoked his probations and sentenced him to serve 60 months in prison.1 Respondent contends that the opinion contains a factual error that affects the outcome of this case, at least in part. 2025Respondent filed a petition for reconsideration of our decision in State ex rel Torres-Lopez v. Fahrion, 373 Or 816 , 572 P3d 1045 (2025), where we held that a trial court may grant presentence incarceration credit under ORS 137.370(4) for the 125 days that relator spent in custody after his arrest on outstanding warrants and before the Marion County Circuit Court revoked his probations and sentenced him to serve 60 months in prison.1 Respondent contends that the opinion contains a factual error that affects the outcome of this case, at least in part. | 2 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Najar
neutral
1 sentence2024Defendant has petitioned for reconsideration of our opinion in this case, 329 Or App 183 (2023) (nonprecedential memorandum opinion), asserting that the opinion contains a factual error. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Kinzua Res., LLC v. Or. Dep't of Envtl. Quality
green
2 sentences2019Specifically, petitioners argue that the opinion contains a factual error at 295 Or. 2019App. at 401 n. 4, 434 P.3d 461 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Valdez
green
1 sentence2017Defendant petitions for reconsideration of our opinion, State v. Valdez, 283 Or App 77 , 388 P3d 396 (2016), contending that the opinion contains a factual error. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Jones
green
2 sentences2008*452 PER CURIAM Defendant has moved for reconsideration of our decision in State v. Jones, 223 Or App 70 , 195 P3d 78 (2008), on the ground that the opinion contains a factual error. 2008*452 PER CURIAM Defendant has moved for reconsideration of our decision in State v. Jones, 223 Or App 70 , 195 P3d 78 (2008), on the ground that the opinion contains a factual error. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
In the Matter of Km-R.
green
1 sentence2007Defendant has moved for reconsideration of our opinion in State v. Boone, 213 Or App 242 , 160 P3d 994 (2007), on the ground that the opinion contains a factual error. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
State v. Boone
green
1 sentence2007Defendant has moved for reconsideration of our opinion in State v. Boone, 213 Or App 242 , 160 P3d 994 (2007), on the ground that the opinion contains a factual error. | 1 | 2007–2007 |