Oregon Supreme Court· 10/7/1998

State v. Hall

Citations

966 P.2d 208
327 Or. 568

How courts have described this case

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

recognizing that jury could find implicit threat of force where the defendant entered restaurant late at night, dressed in a manner that disguised his identity, and told employee to give him money from cash registers
explaining that, in analyzing the sufficiency of the evidence, an appellate court “make[s] no distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence as to the degree of proof required”
stating the standard for reviewing a denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal
in reviewing denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal, court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the state
if the evidence supports multiple reasonable inferences, it is for the trier of fact to decide which inference to draw and whether that inference establishes the ultimate fact in issue beyond a reasonable doubt
providing standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carson, Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Durham, Leeson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

93 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.