State v. Mullens

How courts have described this case

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

• “[A]s we have previously held, we will not consider the state’s lack-of-exploitation argument as an alternative basis for affirmance where that argument was not made below and the record may have developed differently had it been raised.” (Citation omitted.)
• “ [A] s we have previously held, * * * we will not consider * * * an alternative basis for affirmance where that argument was not made below and the record may have developed differently had it been raised.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Keller
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-08-17· cited 14×
• State v. Musalf
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-08-03· cited 8×
• State v. Decker
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-02-22· cited 5×
• State v. Aguirre-Lopez
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-04-04· cited 4×
• State v. Mock
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-04-07· cited 3×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Outdoor Media Dimensions Inc. v. State
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2001-03-08· cited 428×
• State v. Unger
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2014-08-28· cited 113×
• State v. Dennis
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2012-06-27· cited 17×
• State v. Booth
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-07-08· cited 17×
• State v. Klein
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2010-03-31· cited 13×