Skip to main content

State v. Graves

Citations

  • 700 P.2d 244
  • 299 Or. 189
  • 1985 Ore. LEXIS 1245

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that phrase “commonly used” in defining burglary tools was unconstitutionally vague
  • striking down a provision of an aggravated burglary statute, apparently on its face
  • striking down a provision of an aggravated burglary statute, apparently on its face
  • striking down a first degree burglary statute on facial vagueness grounds
  • first-degree burglary conviction predicated on possession of burglar’s tool modified to second-degree burglary when statutory definition of “burglar’s tool” was held unconstitutionally vague
  • Article I, section 20, is implicated “when vague laws give unbridled discretion to judges and jurors to decide what is prohibited in a given case, for this results in the unequal application of criminal laws”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

6 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.