State v. Groff

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 trial court did not improperly “cajole[ ] [the] defen- dant to accept counsel despite his requests to the contrary” when the trial court advised him of the benefits of having counsel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Joyce
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-05-15· cited 5×
• State v. Akers
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-11-14· cited 1×
• State v. Covernali
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2025-07-02· cited 1×
• State v. Morales
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2026-04-22

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Indiana v. Edwards
  Supreme Court· 2008-06-19· cited 1,118×
• State v. Meyrick
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1992-04-23· cited 136×
• State v. Hightower
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2017-04-27· cited 56×
• State v. Davis
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1991-12-18· cited 20×
• State v. Nyquist
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-08-22· cited 14×
• State v. Glasby
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2019-12-18· cited 10×
• State v. Brooks
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2019-12-18· cited 9×
• State v. Hayne
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-08-15· cited 6×
• State v. Haines
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-01-25· cited 6×