Court of Appeals of Oregon· 6/23/2010

State v. Lewis

Citations

234 P.3d 152
236 Or. App. 49
2010 Ore. App. LEXIS 662

How courts have described this case

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

holding that \preservation was not required\ when the error appeared for the first time on the face of the judgment
holding that preservation was not required where the matters claimed as error on appeal were not announced in open court but appeared for the first time in the judgment
concluding that preservation was not required when the aspects of a sentence claimed as error simply appeared on the face of the judgment, but were not announced in open court
concluding that preservation was not required when the aspects of a sentence claimed as error simply appeared on the face of the judgment, but were not announced in open court
holding \preservation was not required\ when the challenged portions of the defendant's sentence were not announced in open court, but instead simply appeared on the face of the judgment
applying that principle where error appeared for the first time in the judgment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haselton, Armstrong, Edmonds

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

2 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.