Protests 114444-K of Mackay

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the Supreme Court, in State v. Schiller-Munneman , 359 Or. 808 , 813, 377 P.3d 554 (2016
• noting that in State v. Schiller-Munneman, 359 Or 808, 813, 377 P3d 554 (2016
• explaining that to “determine whether it is reversible error to admit evidence of a defendant’s exercise of his or her rights, we look to the likelihood that the jury would draw a prejudicial inference”
• explaining that to “determine whether it is reversible error to admit evidence of a defendant’s exercise of his or her rights, we look to the likelihood that the jury would draw a prejudicial inference”
• where defendant invoked her right to silence, a prosecutor’s question as to why she did not tell her exculpatory story to the arresting officer was an improper comment on silence
• where defendant invoked her right to silence, a prosecutor’s question as to why she did not tell her exculpatory story to the arresting officer was an improper comment on silence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).