Court of Appeals of Oregon· 6/26/2003

State v. Gonzalez

Citations

71 P.3d 573
188 Or. App. 430
2003 Ore. App. LEXIS 768

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that the defendant’s closing argument that the state had not adduced legally sufficient evidence to establish the required culpable mental state “is the equivalent of a motion for judgment of acquittal”
explaining that, when a case is tried to the court, challenging the legal suf- ficiency of the evidence in closing argument is equivalent to moving for judgment of acquittal
explaining that, when a case is tried to the court, challenging the legal sufficiency of the evidence in closing argument is equivalent to moving for a judgment of acquittal
explaining that, when a case is tried to the court, challenging the legal sufficiency of the evidence in closing argument is equivalent to moving for a judgment of acquittal
explaining that, when a case is tried to the court, challenging the legal suf- ficiency of the evidence in closing argument is equivalent to moving for judgment of acquittal
explaining that, when a case is tried to the court, challenging the legal sufficiency of the evidence in clos- ing argument is equivalent to moving for judgment of acquit- tal

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haselton, Linder, Wollheim

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by 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.