Skip to main content

State v. Cotton

Citations

  • 400 P.2d 1022
  • 240 Or. 252
  • 1965 Ore. LEXIS 489

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the defendant’s original sentence was void because it violated the sentencing statutes
  • holding that the defendant’s original sentence was void because it violated the sentencing statutes
  • sentencing court had duty to vacate invalid sentence and impose valid sentence even though defendant had begun serving sentence
  • sentencing court had duty to vacate invalid sentence and impose valid sentence even though defendant had begun serving sentence
  • “The court in imposing punishment for a criminal offense is limited strictly to the provisions of the applicable statute, and any deviation from the statute in the mode, extent or place of punishment renders the judgment void.”
  • ‘The court in imposing punishment for a criminal offense is limited strictly to the provisions of the applicable statute, and any deviation from the statute in the mode, extent or place of punishment renders the judgment void.’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McAllister, Perry, O'Connell, Denecke, Lusk

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite 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.