DeAngelo v. Schiedler

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, for the purposes of Article I, section 11, a “criminal prosecution” includes “an ordinary sentencing hearing”
• holding that the petitioner was excused from making a record of what she would have said when the trial court cut off all further communications in no uncertain terms
• holding that the sentencing court violated the petitioner’s state constitutional right to be heard at her sentencing hearing by asking if she had anything to say but then quickly interrupting her, telling her that it did not want to listen to her anymore, and imposing sentence
• holding that the sentencing court violated the petitioner’s state constitutional right to be heard at her sentencing hearing by asking if she had anything to say but then quickly interrupting her, telling her that it did not want to listen to her anymore, and imposing sentence
• recognizing right to make statements “relevant to existing * * * parole practices”
• declining to reach Sixth Amendment claim where Oregon Constitution provided protection sought by post-conviction petitioner

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).