State v. Matheson

How courts have described this case

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

• exercising discretion to correct plain error as to sufficiency of the evidence where the defendant would not obtain a more advantageous result, it was unlikely that the state could have reopened the record, and the gravity of the error was substantial
• addressing as plain error sufficiency of evidence where, among other things, victim’s testimony made it unlikely that, had the state been able to reopen the record, it could have elicited additional evidence to remedy the deficiency
• “The erroneous admission of evidence does not vitiate the voluntariness of the defendant’s later decision to testify in his own behalf.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Reynolds
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2012-06-20· cited 63×
• State v. Ross
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-05-13· cited 12×
• State v. Moore
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-07-01· cited 5×
• State v. Van Nelson
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2026-05-06