Skip to main content

State v. Hanson

Citations

  • 280 Or. App. 196
  • 380 P.3d 1136
  • 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 983

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 challenged testimony does not qualify for plain error review because, to decide the issue, we would have to choose between competing inferences about whether defendant made a conscious decision not to object to the testimony”
  • failure to object to vouching evidence from the victim’s mother on a collateral issue where criminal trial counsel later used the vouching testimony in cross-examination of the vouching witness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Sercombe, Tookey, Wollheim

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 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.