State v. Shaff

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “the officer asked repetitive questions” when concluding that the confrontation with incriminating evidence contributed to the existence of compelling circumstances
• error was not harmless because the erroneously admitted statement was the “defendant’s only admission in connection with [the particular count]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Shaff
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2007-12-28· cited 66×
• State v. Saunders
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2008-07-02· cited 22×
• State v. Northcutt
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2011-10-26· cited 17×
• State v. Hickman
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2017-12-28· cited 8×
• State v. Saunders
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2007-02-14· cited 6×
• State v. Saunders
  Oregon Supreme Court· 2008-03-06· cited 4×
• State v. Olivar
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2007-11-07· cited 4×
• State v. Dean
  Court of Appeals of Oregon· 2021-02-10· cited 3×