Oregon Supreme Court· 10/2/2003

State v. Davis

Citations

77 P.3d 1111
336 Or. 19
2003 Ore. LEXIS 650

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that erroneously excluded evidence that “goes directly to the heart of defendant’s factual theory of the case” likely affected the verdict
holding that evidentiary error is harmless for the purposes of Article VII (Amended), section 3, if \there is little likelihood that the error affected the verdict\
concluding that an error is harmless only if there is “little likelihood that the error affected the jury’s verdict”
concluding that an error is harmless if there is little likelihood that it affected the verdict
holding that evi-dentiary error is not reversible error if it is harmless, that is, if there is “little likelihood that the error affected the verdict”
concluding that evidentiary error was prejudicial, in part because the excluded evidence went “directly to the heart of defendant’s factual theory of the case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carson, Gillette, Durham, Riggs, De Muniz Balmer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Davis

2,525 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.