48 Or. App. 771 - State v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An appeal may be taken by the defendant who has plead guilty from a judgment on conviction, where the judgment of conviction imposes an excessive fine, or imposes excessive, cruel or unusual punishment. If the judgment of conviction is in the circuit court, the appeal shall be taken to the supreme court; if in the district court or the justice of the peace court, or municipal or city recorder's court, the appeal shall be taken to the circuit court of the county in which such court is located. On such appeal, the appellate court shall only consider the question as to whether an excessive fine has been imposed, or excessive, cruel or unusual punishment has been inflicted which is not proportionate to the offense. If, in the judgment of the appellate court, the fine imposed or the punishment inflicted is excessive, unusual or cruel and not proportionate to the offense, it shall direct the court from which the appeal is taken to impose the punishment which should be administered.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Clevenger

2. “It is true, as the state points out, that this court has previously and specifically held that a defendant's claim that his guilty plea should be set aside on the ground that the trial court failed to advise him of a consequence of his plea could not, by virtue of ORS 138.050, be considered on direct appeal. State v. Ferren, 3 Or. App. 224 , 473 P.2d 165 (1970). However, Ferren involved the right to be told of a direct consequence of the plea — the maximum sentence. This is a consideration of constitutional significance. Jones v. Cupp, 7 Or. App. 415, 417 , 490 P.2d 1038 (1971), rev. den. (1972), and therefore cognizable under post conviction relief. ORS 138.530(1)(a). By contrast, defendant's right to be advised here is statutory only and not cognizable under post conviction relief. See, e.g., Jones v. Cupp, supra . If the right is to be enforced at all, it must be enforced by direct appeal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 66 Or. App. 777 - Lyons v. Pearce

3. “(1) The court shall not accept a plea of guilty or no contest to a felony or other charge on which the defendant appears in person without first addressing the defendant personally and determining that the defendant understands the nature of the charge.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Evans