Court of Appeals of Oregon· 12/20/2006

State v. Tanner

Citations

150 P.3d 31
210 Or. App. 70
2006 Ore. App. LEXIS 1965

How courts have described this case

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

noting that several jurisdictions have held that Apprendi does not apply to sentencing statutes that require factual findings before a court may impose consecutive sentences
noting that several jurisdictions have held that Apprendi does not apply to sentencing statutes that require factual findings before a court may impose consecutive sentences
the core concern of Apprendi is that the jury determine every element for each crime charged, not that the jury determine the manner in which sentences for separate offenses are to be served
the core concern of Apprendi is that the jury determine every element for each crime charged, not that the jury determine the manner in which sentences for separate offenses are to be served
majority concluding that ORS 137.123(5)(a) requires factual findings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brewer, Edmonds, Landau, Haselton, Armstrong, Linder, Wollheim, Schuman, Ortega, Rosenblum

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

38 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.