Oregon Supreme Court· 8/18/1994

State v. Stevens

Citations

879 P.2d 162
319 Or. 573
1994 Ore. LEXIS 84

How courts have described this case

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

holding that relevance of evidence with respect to the so-called “fourth question” under ORS 163.150(1)(b)(D) to be determined under criteria established by ORS 163.150(1)(c)(B)
holding, based upon a state statute, that the defendant’s wife could testify as to whether it would be better for her and her daughter if the defendant was executed or spent his life in prison
“While the witness’s testimony may not offer any direct evidence about defendant’s character or background, it does offer circumstantial evidence.”
standard of relevance set forth in OEC 401 applies in penalty phase proceedings
standard of relevance set forth in OEC 401 applies in penalty phase proceedings
interpreting statute and United States Supreme Court cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carson, Fadeley, Van Hoomissen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

32 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.