Oregon Supreme Court· 7/29/1999
State v. Hart
Citations
- 985 P.2d 1260
- 329 Or. 140
- 1999 Ore. LEXIS 500
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- declining to impose a requirement on courts to make written findings under ORS 137.106, and noting that “the word ‘findings’ does not appear in that section at all”
- trial courts are encouraged to state findings on the record, which “always are useful and, on occasion, could even be critical” to appellate review
- “[Sentences * * * imposed for felony convictions after November 1,1989, are subject to review under ORS 138.222,” not ORS 138.040.
- ORS 137.106(2), which requires trial courts to \take into account\ three factors in determining whether to order restitution, does not require trial court to make explicit determinations or findings as to the statutory factors
- ORS 137.106(2), which requires trial courts to “take into account” three factors in determining whether to order restitution, does not require trial court to make explicit determinations or findings as to the statutory factors
- where the applicable statute did not expressly require the trial court to make findings regarding a defendant’s ability to make restitution to the victim, the court was enjoined by ORS 174.010 from reading that requirement into the statute
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Carson, Gillette, Van Hoomissen Durham
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Peeples v. LampertOregon Supreme Court· 2008-08-14· cited 389×
- State v. CloutierOregon Supreme Court· 2011-09-22· cited 233×
- State v. Aguirre-RodriguezOregon Supreme Court· 2021-03-04· cited 37×
- State v. Ignacio GutierrezCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2005-02-16· cited 21×
- State v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2004-06-02· cited 15×
- Bacote v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2000-07-12· cited 14×
- Antunez v. LampertCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2000-07-12· cited 12×
- State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. RialCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2002-05-08· cited 12×
- Whipple v. HillCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2005-10-12· cited 5×
- Gildroy v. Board of Tax Service ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2002-10-16· cited 2×
- State v. VancleaveCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1999-10-13· cited 1×
- State v. MotschenbacherCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1999-09-29
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court· 1993-10-19· cited 2,400×
- McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court· 1998-04-23· cited 77×
- State v. HartOregon Supreme Court· 1985-05-07· cited 53×
- State v. EdsonOregon Supreme Court· 1999-07-29· cited 44×
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Tualatin Tire & Auto, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court· 1997-03-20· cited 43×
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Tualatin Tire & Auto, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court· 1995-12-29· cited 38×
- State v. HartCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1997-09-10· cited 10×
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.