Oregon Supreme Court· 12/27/2013
State v. Phillips
Citations
- 354 Or. 598
- 317 P.3d 236
- 2013 WL 6842787
- 2013 Ore. LEXIS 1037
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- explaining that a jury-concurrence instruction is required when the state advances alternative theories of criminal liability
- holding that when the state argues that the evidence supports a defendant’s con- viction under either an accomplice or principal theory of lia- bility, the trial court must provide an instruction requiring jury concurrence on a single theory of liability if requested
- holding that when the state argues that the evidence supports a defendant’s con- viction under either an accomplice or principal theory of lia- bility, the trial court must provide an instruction requiring jury concurrence on a single theory of liability if requested
- holding error to be harmless where there were not two separate, competing factual theories and where the act and intent necessary for accomplice liability, on the particular facts, subsumed those of principal liability
- explaining that when “the factual findings neces- sary to find defendant liable on one theory either subsumed or were the same as the factual findings on the other the- ory[,]” the error of not giving a concurrence instruction is harmless
- looking to criminal common-law context to deter- mine that the term “aided” required intent
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Kistler
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
24 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. AshkinsOregon Supreme Court· 2015-09-11· cited 75×
- Purdy v. Deere & Co.Oregon Supreme Court· 2014-04-17· cited 37×
- State v. GainesCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-12-30· cited 26×
- State v. StowellCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2020-05-06· cited 18×
- State v. KimbroughOregon Supreme Court· 2018-12-06· cited 15×
- Mellerio v. NoothMalheur County Circuit Court, Oregon· 2016-07-07· cited 10×
- State v. MorganOregon Supreme Court· 2017-02-16· cited 9×
- State v. MirandaCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2018-03-14· cited 9×
- State v. CarrCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-05-18· cited 9×
- State v. BurrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-04-22· cited 8×
- State v. BowenCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-08-31· cited 8×
- State v. RoyCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-12-02· cited 7×
- State v. SlaviakCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2019-04-03· cited 6×
- State v. MunozCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-04-22· cited 5×
- State v. WrightCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-10-05· cited 5×
- State v. BurrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2019-12-18· cited 5×
- State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2024-07-17· cited 2×
- State v. RyderCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2014-11-26· cited 1×
- State v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-12-30· cited 1×
- Richards v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2025-12-03· cited 1×
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Schad v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1991-09-13· cited 1,454×
- State v. BootsOregon Supreme Court· 1989-09-26· cited 111×
- State v. NefstadOregon Supreme Court· 1990-04-03· cited 65×
- State v. PipkinOregon Supreme Court· 2013-12-12· cited 56×
- State v. MoranOregon Supreme Court· 1887-06-14· cited 51×
- State v. Lopez-MinjarezOregon Supreme Court· 2011-08-25· cited 48×
- State v. PineOregon Supreme Court· 2003-12-26· cited 46×
- State v. BlakeOregon Supreme Court· 2010-03-25· cited 28×
- State v. FraserOregon Supreme Court· 1922-09-26· cited 16×
- State v. BrantonOregon Supreme Court· 1899-02-27· cited 12×
- State v. PhillipsCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2011-04-20· cited 8×
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.