State v. Fitch

How courts have described this case

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

• “As with the intent element of crimes, ‘purpose’ is generally provable only by circumstantial evidence.”
• circumstantial evidence used to prove the defendant acted for the purpose of arousing his sexual desire
• evidence that, immediately before touching victim’s vagina, defendant’s penis was being fondled by his wife was “probative of sexual arousal and probative, in turn, of his 1 sexual | purpose in touching the intimate parts of the victim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Mitchell
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1996-07-03· cited 13×
• State v. D. B. O.
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2023-06-14· cited 13×
• State v. Woodley
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1987-12-09· cited 8×
• Moore v. Oregon State Board of Parole
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1981-10-26· cited 7×
• State v. Pierce
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-02-25· cited 5×
• State ex rel. Juvenile Department v. Evans
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2000-12-27· cited 3×