Houghton v. Mann

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the “purpose of the 1989 amend- ment was to expand the bases for joinder”
• stating that alleging the basis for joinder is not difficult and that using the language of the joinder statute generally is sufficient
• observing that the 1989 amendment to ORS 132.560 was based on Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure (FRCrP) 8 and apparently “imported text from * * * FRCrP 8(a)
• explaining that when read together, “the joinder and demurrer statutes establish a pleading requirement and a means for enforcing that requirement. The joinder statute requires that an indictment charge only one offense, unless an exception applies”
• explaining that when read together, “the joinder and demurrer statutes establish a pleading requirement and a means for enforcing that requirement. The joinder statute requires that an indictment charge only one offense, unless an exception applies”
• stating that, “for more than one hundred years, Oregon law has limited the number of offenses that can be charged in a single charging instrument and has required that charging instruments allege facts sufficient to demonstrate compliance with those limits”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).