State of Oregon v. Holland

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining the nonsubstantive nature of the 1953 revision and how it represented a continuation of existing law
• “Errors which may be curable should not be ignored until jeopardy has attached, and then be insisted upon as a bar.”
• defendant who fails to demur at time of arraignment waives objection to indictment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).