Court of Appeals of Oregon· 7/2/2008

State v. Saunders

Citations

188 P.3d 449
221 Or. App. 116
2008 Ore. App. LEXIS 884

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that confronting the defendant with incriminating evidence, without using the evidence coercively, did not create compelling circumstances
declining to review trial testimony on an appeal from a pretrial motion
circumstances not compelling where the police interviewed the defendant in his own home and confronted him with incriminating evidence in a noncoercive manner
interview in the defendant’s home, which lasted one and a half hours, was not compelling
“[A] party’s request that the court give a jury instruction invites error resulting from the instruction.”
“[A] party’s request that the court give a jury instruction invites error resulting from the instruction.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Schuman, Ortega, Rosenblum

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 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.