Court of Appeals of Oregon· 5/1/1996

State v. Park

Citations

916 P.2d 334
140 Or. App. 507
1996 Ore. App. LEXIS 626
1996 WL 223331

How courts have described this case

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

distinguishing Carlson and holding that whether the defendant wrote a letter found at a residence that did not belong to him was “a question of conditional relevancy under OEC 104(2)” and not a preliminary question of fact under OEC 104(1)
a factfinder’s ability to compare authenticated and disputed signatures was sufficient to “permit a trier of fact to conclude that [a particular person’s] signature [was] on the letter”
16 hours of training and experience with “numerous grow- ing operations” sufficient to allow witness to testify as to whether marijuana plants were clones or seed starts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Warren, P.J., and Edmonds and Armstrong

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

5 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.