2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from State v. Phelps.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State v. Phelps Anchor | green | “by its expression in ors 163.325(3), the legislature has indicated its intention that knowledge of the incapacity to consent of a person within the definition of ors 163.375(1)(d) is not a material element of the offense and that that statute controls over the general mandate of…” | 3 |
| 2 | State v. Woods | green | “in sum, nothing in simonov or haltom displaces our conclusion in phelps that requiring proof that a defendant knew of the victim's incapacity would be inconsistent with the affirmative defense in ors 163.325(3) and its legisla- tive history; as a consequence, those cases are not…” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.