Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1/8/2025

State v. Carlton

Citations

563 P.3d 407
337 Or. App. 354

How courts have described this case

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

the purposes of preservation were not served where the trial court sua sponte commented on merger, but “[t]here was no opportunity for the court to consider, or for the state to respond to, the arguments in favor of merger that defendant raises for the first time on appeal”
the purposes of preservation were not served where the trial court sua sponte commented on merger, but “[t]here was no opportunity for the court to consider, or for the state to respond to, the arguments in favor of merger that defendant raises for the first time on appeal”
the purposes of preservation were not served where the trial court sua sponte commented on merger, but “[t]here was no opportunity for the court to consider, or for the state to respond to, the arguments in favor of merger that defendant raises for the first time on appeal”
the purposes of preservation were not served where the trial court sua sponte commented on merger, but “[t]here was no opportunity for the court to consider, or for the state to respond to, the arguments in favor of merger that defendant raises for the first time on appeal”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Aoyagi

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

21 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.