State v. Richardson

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that “a defendant’s statements may be used to clarify the likely consequences of a nonspeech action”
• noting Cite as 316 Or App 762 (2022) 771 that in “subsequent cases, we have reaffirmed the holding of Cantwell”
• bang- ing on a door and shouting for someone to open it was pri- marily speech

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Davis
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2020-03-18· cited 10×
• State v. William Schenk
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2018-05-04· cited 7×
• State v. Hosley
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2016-12-14· cited 6×
• State v. Leers
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2022-01-05· cited 3×
• State v. Pitts
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2023-08-09· cited 1×

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Cantwell
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1984-02-08· cited 35×
• State v. Link
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2009-05-07· cited 22×
• State v. Atwood
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2004-10-06· cited 18×
• State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. Krieger
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-10-03· cited 15×
• City of Eugene v. Lee
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2001-10-31· cited 14×
• State v. Miller
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2009-03-04· cited 9×
• State v. Tilly
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-03-18· cited 6×
• State v. Kreft
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2015-04-01· cited 5×