method analysis in Oregon

2018A trial court makes the record required by Mayfield if the record reflects that the court employed the four-part method of analysis adopted by the Supreme Court in Mayfield : (1) "analyze the quantum of probative value of the evidence and consider the weight or strength of the evidence"; (2) "determine how prejudicial the evidence is, to what extent the evidence may distract the jury from the central question whether the defendant committed the charged crime"; (3) balance steps one and two; and (4) make a ruling on admission. 302 Or. at 645 , 733 P.2d 438 .

2018A trial court makes the record required by Mayfield if the record reflects that the court employed the four-part method of analysis adopted by the Supreme Court in Mayfield : (1) "analyze the quantum of probative value of the evidence and consider the weight or strength of the evidence"; (2) "determine how prejudicial the evidence is, to what extent the evidence may distract the jury from the central question whether the defendant committed the charged crime"; (3) balance steps one and two; and (4) make a ruling on admission. 302 Or. at 645 , 733 P.2d 438 .

2024The legislative history also clarifies that the special requirements for disabled parents do not lower the minimum standards required to parent a child, but they do require that, if a parent with a disability “needs a different method of instruction to learn the techniques” Cite as 373 Or 26 (2024) 53 than DHS would normally teach parents, then the parent must be provided instruction by a method “appropriately tailored to be useful to the individual.” Exhibit 12, Senate Committee on Human Services, SB 492, Feb 12, 2019 (report accompanying the statement of Bob Joondeph). 3.

2024The legislative history also clarifies that the special requirements for disabled parents do not lower the minimum standards required to parent a child, but they do require that, if a parent with a disability “needs a different method of instruction to learn the techniques” Cite as 373 Or 26 (2024) 53 than DHS would normally teach parents, then the parent must be provided instruction by a method “appropriately tailored to be useful to the individual.” Exhibit 12, Senate Committee on Human Services, SB 492, Feb 12, 2019 (report accompanying the statement of Bob Joondeph). 3.

2019Hazell v. Brown , 352 Or. 455 , 465, 287 P.3d 1079 (2012) ("[W]e apply a similar method of analysis to statutes enacted by voter-initiated measures as we do to statutes enacted by the legislature, with the goal of discerning the intent of the voters who passed those initiatives into law."); State v. Guzek , 322 Or. 245 , 265, 906 P.2d 272 (1995).

2019Hazell v. Brown , 352 Or. 455 , 465, 287 P.3d 1079 (2012) ("[W]e apply a similar method of analysis to statutes enacted by voter-initiated measures as we do to statutes enacted by the legislature, with the goal of discerning the intent of the voters who passed those initiatives into law."); State v. Guzek , 322 Or. 245 , 265, 906 P.2d 272 (1995).

2018"Essentially, to comport with Mayfield , the court's record must do two things: (1) demonstrate that the court consciously conducted the required balancing; and (2) allow for meaningful review of that balancing." Ydrogo , 289 Or.

2018"Essentially, to comport with Mayfield , the court's record must do two things: (1) demonstrate that the court consciously conducted the required balancing; and (2) allow for meaningful review of that balancing." Ydrogo , 289 Or.App. at 492 , 410 P.3d 1097 (emphasis in original).

2016See, e.g., Adelson v. Harris, 973 F Supp 2d 467, 488-89 (SDNY 2013) (applying Ninth Circuit’s 718 Neumann v. Liles three-part test, noting that test, “while not binding on this court, is instructive”); Dodson v. Dicker, 306 Ark 108, 111 , 812 SW2d 97, 98 (1991) (concluding that “the Ninth Circuit’s method of analysis is a reasonable extension of the Milkovich doctrine” and following that method); Gold v. Harrison, 88 Haw 94, 101, 962 P2d 353, 360 (1998), cert den, 526 US 1018 (1999) (adopting “three-part test as set forth by the Ninth Circuit to determine whether a statement is false and defam

2016See, e.g., Adelson v. Harris, 973 F Supp 2d 467, 488-89 (SDNY 2013) (applying Ninth Circuit’s *718 three-part test, noting that test, “while not binding on this court, is instructive”); Dodson v. Dicker, 306 Ark 108, 111 , 812 SW2d 97, 98 (1991) (concluding that “the Ninth Circuit’s method of analysis is a reasonable extension of the Milkovich doctrine” and following that method); Gold v. Harrison, 88 Haw 94, 101, 962 P2d 353, 360 (1998), cert den, 526 US 1018 (1999) (adopting “three-part test as set forth by the Ninth Circuit to determine whether a statement is false and defamatory” under Fir

2016The method of analysis set forth in Mayfield “is a matter of substance, not form or litany.” State v. Brown, 272 Or App 424, 433 , 355 P3d 216 , rev den, 358 Or 145 (2015).

2016The method of analysis set forth in Mayfield “is a matter of substance, not form or litany.” State v. Brown, 272 Or App 424, 433 , 355 P3d 216 , rev den, 358 Or 145 (2015).

2013The court engaged in an extended historical analysis of the scope and effect of the remedy clause and established a new method of analysis of claims arising under it. 332 Or at 123-24 .

2013The court engaged in an extended historical analysis of the scope and effect of the remedy clause and established a new method of analysis of claims arising under it. 332 Or at 123-24 .

2004Ecumenical Ministries v. Oregon State Lottery Comm., 318 Or 551, 559-60 , 871 P2d 106 (1994), which is the same method of analysis that must be applied in the interpretation of statutes as described in PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12 , 859 P2d 1143 (1993).

2004Ecumenical Ministries v. Oregon State Lottery Comm., 318 Or 551, 559-60 , 871 P2d 106 (1994), which is the same method of analysis that must be applied in the interpretation of statutes as described in PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12 , 859 P2d 1143 (1993).

2002In State v. Robertson, 293 Or 402 , 649 P2d 569 (1982), however, the court adopted a different method of analysis.

2002In State v. Robertson, 293 Or 402 , 649 P2d 569 (1982), however, the court adopted a different method of analysis.

2024Id. at 605 n 4.

2019As well as the text of the measure, "we look to the voters' pamphlet and other information that was available to the public at the time of the vote." State v. Sagdal , 258 Or.

2017State v. Baughman, 276 Or App 754, 772 , 369 P3d 423 , rev allowed, 359 Or 847 (2016) (quoting State v. Mayfield, 302 Or 631, 645 , 733 P2d 438 (1987) (describing the method of analysis that a trial judge should follow in making a decision under OEC 403)).

2017State v. Baughman, 276 Or App 754, 772 , 369 P3d 423 , rev allowed, 359 Or 847 (2016) (quoting State v. Mayfield, 302 Or 631, 645 , 733 P2d 438 (1987) (describing the method of analysis that a trial judge should follow in making a decision under OEC 403)).

2016“Thus, even if a trial court does not expressly follow the Mayfield analysis, it nonetheless meets the requirements of Mayfield if the record establishes that, in deciding to admit the evidence, the trial court considered the matters prescribed in Mayfield.” State v. Corbin, 275 Or App 609, 616 , 365 P3d 647 (2015) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted).

2016“Thus, even if a trial court does not expressly follow the Mayfield analysis, it nonetheless meets the requirements of Mayfield if the record establishes that, in deciding to admit the evidence, the trial court considered the matters prescribed in Mayfield.” State v. Corbin, 275 Or App 609, 616 , 365 P3d 647 (2015) (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted).

2015Thus, even if a trial court does not ‘“expressly follow the Mayfield analysis,’” it nonetheless meets the requirements of Mayfield if “the record establishes that, in deciding to admit [the evidence], the trial court considered the matters prescribed in Mayfield.” Borck, 230 Or App at 637 (quoting State v. Meyers, 132 Or App 585, 588 , 889 P2d 374 (1995)).

2015Thus, even if a trial court does not ‘“expressly follow the Mayfield analysis,’” it nonetheless meets the requirements of Mayfield if “the record establishes that, in deciding to admit [the evidence], the trial court considered the matters prescribed in Mayfield.” Borck, 230 Or App at 637 (quoting State v. Meyers, 132 Or App 585, 588 , 889 P2d 374 (1995)).

2015Thus, even if a trial court does not ‘“expressly follow the Mayfield analysis,’” it nonetheless meets the requirements of Mayfield if “the record establishes that, in deciding to admit [the evidence], the trial court considered the matters prescribed in Mayfield.” Borck, 230 Or App at 637 (quoting State v. Meyers, 132 Or App 585, 588 , 889 P2d 374 (1995)).

2012Recently, in State v. Rainoldi, 351 Or 486 , 268 P3d 568 (2011), the Supreme Court addressed the proper method of analysis of the extent to which- an offense not within the Oregon Criminal Code requires proof of a culpable mental state as to a particular element.

2012Recently, in State v. Rainoldi, 351 Or 486 , 268 P3d 568 (2011), the Supreme Court addressed the proper method of analysis of the extent to which- an offense not within the Oregon Criminal Code requires proof of a culpable mental state as to a particular element.

2011Appeal dismissed as moot. 1 The parties agree that the activities in which C wanted to participate, including choir, were involved in “interscholastic competition.” 2 OSAA v. Stout, 71 Or App 405 , 407 n 1, 692 P2d 633 (1984), is not to the contrary.

2011Appeal dismissed as moot. 1 The parties agree that the activities in which C wanted to participate, including choir, were involved in “interscholastic competition.” 2 OSAA v. Stout, 71 Or App 405 , 407 n 1, 692 P2d 633 (1984), is not to the contrary.

2011In State v. Rutley, 343 Or 368, 375 , 171 P3d 361 (2007), this court addressed the proper method of analysis of the extent to which an offense not within the Oregon Criminal Code requires proof of a culpable mental state as to a particular element.

2011In State v. Rutley, 343 Or 368, 375 , 171 P3d 361 (2007), this court addressed the proper method of analysis of the extent to which an offense not within the Oregon Criminal Code requires proof of a culpable mental state as to a particular element.

2005The writ of review remains the exclusive means by which plaintiffs could have challenged the formation of the district. [1] ORS 34.020 provides, in pertinent part, that "any party to any process or proceeding before or by any inferior court, officer, or tribunal may have the decision or determination thereof reviewed for errors, as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100, and not otherwise. " (Emphasis added.) [2] See also Owens v. MVD, 319 Or. 259, 266 , 875 P.2d 463 (1994) (holding that the legislature's authorization of particular challenges to the proper administration of a Breathalyzer test impl

2005The writ of review remains the exclusive means by which plaintiffs could have challenged the formation of the district. [1] ORS 34.020 provides, in pertinent part, that "any party to any process or proceeding before or by any inferior court, officer, or tribunal may have the decision or determination thereof reviewed for errors, as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100, and not otherwise. " (Emphasis added.) [2] See also Owens v. MVD, 319 Or. 259, 266 , 875 P.2d 463 (1994) (holding that the legislature's authorization of particular challenges to the proper administration of a Breathalyzer test impl

2005The writ of review remains the exclusive means by which plaintiffs could have challenged the formation of the district. [1] ORS 34.020 provides, in pertinent part, that "any party to any process or proceeding before or by any inferior court, officer, or tribunal may have the decision or determination thereof reviewed for errors, as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100, and not otherwise. " (Emphasis added.) [2] See also Owens v. MVD, 319 Or. 259, 266 , 875 P.2d 463 (1994) (holding that the legislature's authorization of particular challenges to the proper administration of a Breathalyzer test impl

2005The writ of review remains the exclusive means by which plaintiffs could have challenged the formation of the district. [1] ORS 34.020 provides, in pertinent part, that "any party to any process or proceeding before or by any inferior court, officer, or tribunal may have the decision or determination thereof reviewed for errors, as provided in ORS 34.010 to 34.100, and not otherwise. " (Emphasis added.) [2] See also Owens v. MVD, 319 Or. 259, 266 , 875 P.2d 463 (1994) (holding that the legislature's authorization of particular challenges to the proper administration of a Breathalyzer test impl

2005Defendant contends on reconsideration that a motion for a judgment of acquittal is a proper method to challenge the sufficiency of an indictment at trial, citing State v. Meyers, 76 Or App 420 , 709 P2d 253 (1985).

2005Defendant contends on reconsideration that a motion for a judgment of acquittal is a proper method to challenge the sufficiency of an indictment at trial, citing State v. Meyers, 76 Or App 420 , 709 P2d 253 (1985).

2004State ex rel Boe v. Straub, 282 Or 387, 392 , 578 P2d 1247 (1978) (“[T]he exclusive remedy to decide whether one purporting to act as a public officer is holding office lawfully is a proceeding brought in accordance with ORS 30.510.”); State ex rel Madden v. Crawford, 207 Or 76, 81 , 295 P2d 174 (1956) (holding that the statute is the exclusive “remedy or proceeding by which is determined the legality of a claim which a party asserts to the use or exercise of an office or franchise and ousts the holder from its enjoyment, if the claim is not well founded”).

2004State ex rel Boe v. Straub, 282 Or 387, 392 , 578 P2d 1247 (1978) (“[T]he exclusive remedy to decide whether one purporting to act as a public officer is holding office lawfully is a proceeding brought in accordance with ORS 30.510.”); State ex rel Madden v. Crawford, 207 Or 76, 81 , 295 P2d 174 (1956) (holding that the statute is the exclusive “remedy or proceeding by which is determined the legality of a claim which a party asserts to the use or exercise of an office or franchise and ousts the holder from its enjoyment, if the claim is not well founded”).