State v. Carr

How courts have described this case

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

• \The issue of the truthful character of the victim was not raised by testimony suggesting a motive of the victim to lie.\
• merely contradicting a witness’s testimony does not constitute an attack on character for truthfulness
• “The term ‘attacked by opinion’ in OEC 608(l)(b) refers to an attack on the credibility of one witness by testimony in the form of opinion by a second witness that the first witness’s character for truthfulness is bad.” (emphasis in original)
• construing “or otherwise” language in OEC 608(1)(b)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Honeywell v. Sterling Furniture Co.
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1990-08-09· cited 52×
• Powers v. Officer Cheeley
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1989-04-04· cited 25×
• State v. Marshall
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1991-12-12· cited 24×
• State v. Madigan
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2015-04-17· cited 17×
• State v. Caffee
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1992-10-28· cited 11×
• State v. Prange
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2011-12-14· cited 9×
• State v. Presley
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1991-07-03· cited 8×
• State v. Dugan
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-10-31· cited 6×
• State v. Reynolds
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1997-02-06· cited 5×
• State v. Reeder
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1995-10-25· cited 5×
• State v. Clegg
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1999-06-30· cited 4×
• State v. Adonri
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1996-08-28· cited 4×
• State v. Blue
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2025-11-25· cited 3×
• State v. Wyatt
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1990-07-18· cited 1×
• State v. Higgins
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1995-09-13· cited 1×
• State v. Dan
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-02-28· cited 1×