Oregon Supreme Court· 8/3/2000

State v. McNeely

Citations

8 P.3d 212
330 Or. 457
2000 Ore. LEXIS 615

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that “[clonditional relevancy means a situation where one fact is relevant only if another fact is proven”
stating that “[c]onditional relevancy means a situation where one fact is relevant only if another fact is proven”
reasoning that “a medical diagnosis is scientific evidence”; thus, “a diagnosis of child sexual abuse is ‘scientific’ evidence”
declining to consider claim supported by mere summary references to federal constitutional provisions
declining to consider claim supported by mere summary references to federal constitutional provision
“Defendant’s sum- mary reference to the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments is insufficient to present any specific federal constitutional argument to this court and, accordingly, we decline to address the issue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carson, Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Durham, Leeson, Riggs, Vanhoomissen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

15 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.