Oregon Supreme Court· 3/25/2010

State v. Blake

Citations

228 P.3d 560
348 Or. 95
2010 Ore. LEXIS 152

How courts have described this case

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

holding that all three of the circumstances identified in ORS 161.067(1) had to exist in order for there to be separately punishable offenses under that subsection
holding that “possession” in the offense of possession of forged “instruments includes both actual and constructive possession”
holding that “possession” in the offense of possession of forged “instruments includes both actual and constructive possession”
concluding that a defendant cannot commit the offense of first-degree forgery without having sufficient control over the forged instrument so as to be deemed in possession of it
explaining that “[t]he ability to manipulate a bank account using a computer is sufficient to constitute ‘dominion and control * * *.’ ”
explaining that \[t]he ability to manipulate a bank account using a computer is sufficient to constitute `dominion and control * * *.'\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: De Muniz, Gillette, Durham, Balmer, Walters, Linder

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.