State v. Martin

How courts have described this case

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

• possession of another’s identification card is insufficient, by itself, to prove that the defendant acted “with the intent to deceive or to defraud” under ORS 165.800(1), the statute defining the crime of identity theft

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Rogers
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2019-12-18· cited 11×
• State v. McAtee
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2011-08-31· cited 8×
• State v. Cook
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-09-17· cited 3×
• State v. Hodges
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-03-11· cited 3×
• State v. Henderson
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-11-07· cited 2×
• State v. Cotan
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-02-16· cited 1×
• State v. Wright
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2013-11-20
• State v. Lewis
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-07-26