Sparks v. Oregon

How courts have described this case

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

• “Defendant * * * attacks the facial constitutional- ity of the future dangerousness question, set out in ORS 163.150(1)(b)(B) * * *. Because defendant did not preserve those arguments and they do not qualify as error apparent on the face of the record, we do not address them.”
• “Defendant * * * attacks the facial constitutional- ity of the future dangerousness question, set out in ORS 163.150(1)(b)(B) * * *. Because defendant did not preserve those arguments and they do not qualify as error apparent on the face of the record, we do not address them.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).