State v. Bullock

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that contested expenses were not “too remote to be considered the results of defendant’s crime” because “emotional and psychological problems that required the victim’s removal from the home were a natural consequence of defendant’s criminal activities”
• “For purposes of restitution, causation is met by applying a ‘but for’ standard.”
• causal requirement of ORS 137.106(1) met because the emotional and psychological problems the victim developed after sex abuse, which required victim’s placement in residential treatment, “were a natural consequence of defendant’s criminal activities”
• causation is met by applying “but for” standard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. McIntyre
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2002-05-15· cited 34×
• State v. Kirkland
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-01-07· cited 34×
• State v. Pumphrey
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-11-05· cited 32×
• State v. Ramos
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-11-26· cited 15×
• State v. Gerhardt
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-09-16· cited 3×
• State v. Loewen
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1996-05-22· cited 1×

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Dillon
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1981-12-09· cited 98×
• State v. Jones
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1994-08-10· cited 48×
• State v. Rood
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1994-08-10· cited 21×
• State v. Bruce Lincoln Butterfield
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1994-05-11· cited 13×
• State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Dickerson
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1990-01-03· cited 7×
• State v. Solomon
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1995-02-22· cited 5×
• State v. Minniear
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1993-10-20· cited 2×