Oregon Supreme Court· 1/28/1993

State v. Busby

Citations

844 P.2d 897
315 Or. 292
1993 Ore. LEXIS 6

How courts have described this case

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

the failure to make any record of how the defen- dant would have testified was fatal to his claim of eviden- tiary error
to preserve an issue regarding exclusion of evidence, “a defendant must at least * * * sufficiently outline the nature of his testimony so that the trial court, and the reviewing court, can [intelligently consider the ruling]”
a defendant may not attack OEC 609, relating to impeachment by certain prior convictions, as violative of constitutional protections without demonstrating how the operation of the rule in the defendant’s case prevented or diminished his enjoyment of those protections
in order to preserve a challenge to the exclusion of evidence, “a defendant must at least * * * sufficiently outline the nature of his testimony so that the trial court, and the reviewing court, can intelligently consider the ruling” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fadeley, Gillette, Peterson, Graber, Unis, Van Hoomissen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.