Court of Appeals of Oregon· 4/17/1996

State v. Green

Citations

915 P.2d 460
140 Or. App. 308
1996 Ore. App. LEXIS 520

How courts have described this case

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

noting that the “unreasonable delay test [for determining whether a prosecution was initiated within the statute of limitations under ORS 131.135] is the same as the speedy trial analysis under Article I, section 10” (internal citations omitted)
noting that “an attorney’s arguments are not evidence”
33-month delay between issuance and service of warrant unreasonable where state offered no explanation for delay
anxiety not prejudicial under speedy trial analysis when defendant had no knowledge of the indictment before arrest and, thus, no anxiety over “unresolved public accusation”
proper focus of statutory inquiry is not on state’s ability to reindict, but on whether the defendant caused or consented to the delay and whether the delay was unreasonable
“[A]n attorney’s arguments are not evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Deits, De Muniz Haselton, De Muniz

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

19 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.