State v. Easton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on its own motion, the court shall dismiss any criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.763. "(2) This section shall not apply: "(a) When failure to bring the inmate to trial within 90 days after the district attorney receives notice under ORS 135.760 was the result of motions filed on behalf of the inmate, or of a grant by the court of a continuance on motion of the district attorney or on its own motion, for good cause shown; or "(b) When the inmate is unavailable for trial, other than by imprisonment, or because of other pending criminal proceedings against the inmate.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 163 Or. App. 282 - State v. Waechter

2. “(1) Any inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections or of the supervisory authority of a court pursuant to a commitment under ORS 137.124(2) against whom there is pending at the time of commitment or against whom there is filed at any time during imprisonment, in any court of this state, an indictment, information or criminal complaint charging the inmate with the commission of a crime, may give written notice to the district attorney of the court in which the inmate is so charged requesting the district attorney to prosecute and bring the inmate to trial on the charge forthwith.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 163 Or. App. 282 - State v. Waechter

3. “"The basis for our decision in Gilliland was that, once a defendant has requested a speedy trial on charges in an information, indictment or criminal complaint, the state cannot avoid its obligation under ORS 135.760 et seq. by dismissing one accusatory instrument and replacing it with another." (Emphasis in original.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 163 Or. App. 282 - State v. Waechter