Oregon Supreme Court· 7/9/2014

State v. Hickman

Citations

355 Or. 715
330 P.3d 551

How courts have described this case

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

rejecting ineffective assistance of counsel claim for failure to move to suppress first-time in-court identification because, given Perry , motion likely to have been unsuccessful
collecting examples and noting that “[t]he principles on which those decisions rest are embedded in the profound respect that our system of justice holds for the role of juries in the adjudicative process.”
“[w]het- her the eyewitness actually did observe those facts is a cred- ibility determination for the jury”
when identification is made for first time in court, jury can observe ‘‘variables such as indications of witness certainty or hesitation during the identification process, including facial expression, voice inflection and body language’’
“[A]n identification satisfies OEC 602 if the eyewitness testifies to facts that, if believed, would permit a reasonable juror to find that the eyewitness observed the facts necessary to make the identification.”
challenged eyewitnesses provided information about ability to view and where attention was directed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brewer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

18 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.