Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 248 Or. App. 657 - State v. Gilbert

248 Or. App. 657 - State v. Gilbert’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

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. “either orally at the [sentencing] hearing or in the [original] judgment, the court [could] not later amend the judgment to reflect its unexpressed intention to make the sentences consecutive”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[a] sentence shall be deemed to be a concurrent term unless the judgment expressly provides for consecutive sentences.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[A] sentence is, as a matter of law, concurrent unless the judgment expressly provides that it is to be consecutive.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.