Oregon Supreme Court· 4/22/1986
State v. Langan
Citations
- 718 P.2d 719
- 301 Or. 1
- 1986 Ore. LEXIS 1138
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that “expungement” is a “misnomer” because an order pursuant to ORS 137.225 “is not designed to ‘rewrite history’ and deny the occurrence of an event but to limit the purposes for which official records may be used to exhume that past event”
- “The applicant has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence any disputed affirmative fact required by the statute.”
- use of word “shall” in statute providing for trial court order setting aside conviction indicated that, if statutory criteria were met, trial court was required to enter the requested order
- one of the “preconditions for a motion to set aside a conviction” is that “the applicant must have ‘fully complied with and performed the sentence of the court’ ”
- the constitutional right against self-incrimination adheres in any proceeding, judicial or nonjudicial, where “the state seeks to compel testimony that may be used against the witness in a criminal prosecution.”
- one of the “preconditions for a motion to set aside a conviction” is that “the applicant must have ‘fully complied with and performed the sentence of the court’ ”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Peterson, Lent, Linde, Campbell, Carson, Jones
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
29 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. FishOregon Supreme Court· 1995-04-27· cited 76×
- State v. BurkeCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1991-09-25· cited 36×
- State v. K. P.Oregon Supreme Court· 1996-08-01· cited 24×
- State v. TenbuschCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1994-12-14· cited 19×
- State v. BranamCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2008-05-28· cited 15×
- In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of GermundsonOregon Supreme Court· 1986-09-03· cited 11×
- 7455 Inc. v. Oregon Liquor Control CommissionOregon Supreme Court· 1990-11-08· cited 5×
- Patterson v. FooteCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-02-25· cited 5×
- State v. StanfordCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1992-02-26· cited 5×
- State v. Long-EllisCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-01-31· cited 5×
- State v. KindredCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-09-09· cited 5×
- State v. A. R. H.Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-09-22· cited 5×
- State v. SingletonCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-01-12· cited 5×
- State v. BomarCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1986-05-21· cited 4×
- State v. CoughlinCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2013-10-09· cited 4×
- State v. SylvaCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-09-22· cited 4×
- State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1992-12-23· cited 3×
- State v. GrantCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2025-04-09· cited 3×
- State v. J. N. L.Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-02-04· cited 2×
- State v. MendeCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1986-12-17· cited 1×
Cites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Counselman v. HitchcockSupreme Court· 1892-01-11· cited 1,118×
- McCarthy v. ArndsteinSupreme Court· 1924-10-20· cited 393×
- State v. HammondCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1978-06-20· cited 8×
- State v. LanganOregon Supreme Court· 1982-10-26· cited 6×
- State v. GreenCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 1977-05-02· cited 6×
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.