State v. Mejia

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that we have consistently concluded that “an issue is preserved for our review if it is presented clearly in a written motion, notwithstanding a party’s failure to reiterate all of its argu- ments at a subsequent hearing”
• “[W]e have consistently held that an issue is preserved for our review if it is presented clearly in Cite as 317 Or App 672 (2022) 681 a written motion, notwithstanding a party’s failure to reit- erate all of its arguments at a subsequent hearing.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Garcia-Ascencio v. Gonzalez
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-09-14· cited 8×
• State v. Brandes
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-02-24· cited 5×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Bates
  Oregon Supreme Court· 1987-12-22· cited 243×
• State v. Walker
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2011-07-28· cited 171×
• State v. Parnell
  Klamath County Circuit Court, Oregon· 2016-05-11· cited 16×
• State v. Turley
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2005-10-12· cited 14×
• State v. Walker
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2010-04-07· cited 7×
• State v. Geyer
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-07-26· cited 4×
• State v. Holt
  Wasco County Circuit Court, Oregon· 2016-07-27· cited 4×
• State v. Potter
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-11-30· cited 1×