Oregon Supreme Court· 6/18/2009

State v. White

Citations

211 P.3d 248
346 Or. 275
2009 Ore. LEXIS 29

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that robbery necessarily involves “the taking of property using threats of violence or otherwise creating a sense of fear in the victim”
concluding that robbery necessarily involves “the taking of property using threats of violence or otherwise creating a sense of fear in the victim”
noting that “[t]he parties and the courts below often refer to the issue in this case as being whether defendant’s ‘convictions’ merge” but nonetheless addressing the merits of the parties’ merger argument
synthesizing prior merger cases discussing the phrase “statutory provisions” and analyzing how that phrase applied to multiple convictions of second-degree robbery
“ [T] o determine whether an action violates two statutory provisions, we must determine whether the legislature intended to create two crimes or only one.”
“It is the concept of fear or threat of violence that separates robbery from mere theft.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Balmer, Kistler, Walters, Linder

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

11 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.