Skip to main content

State v. O'NEAL

Citations

  • 545 P.2d 910
  • 24 Or. App. 423
  • 1976 Ore. App. LEXIS 2346

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that Oregon has adopted “the general rule that the sentencing authority of a court exists solely by virtue of a statutory grant of power and therefore cannot be exercised in any manner not specifi- cally authorized”
  • noting that Oregon has adopted “the general rule that the sentencing authority of a court exists solely by virtue of a statutory grant of power and therefore cannot be exercised in any manner not specifically authorized”
  • noting that Oregon has adopted “the general rule that the sentencing authority of a court exists solely by virtue of a statutory grant of power and therefore cannot be exercised in any manner not specifically authorized” (citing State v. Cotton, 240 Or 252, 400 P2d 1022 (1965)
  • no tolling of the probationary period by the consequences of defendant’s con- duct since such an extension would need to be specifically authorized by statute
  • “[A] court is without authority to revoke probation for a crime committed during the probationary period when revocation proceedings have not been initiated before the probationary period has expired.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Schwab, Foley, Fort

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

4 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.