Court of Appeals of Oregon· 7/7/1993

State v. Wilson

Citations

855 P.2d 657
121 Or. App. 460
1993 Ore. App. LEXIS 1134

How courts have described this case

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

affirming the denial of the defendant’s motion for a mistrial on the basis of the prosecutor’s suggestion during rebuttal argument that the state had evidence of the defendant’s prior bad acts, when the defendant made the motion after the jury had returned its verdict
where it is clear that the trial court would not take curative action in response to a mistrial motion, preservation principles do not demand that the motion be made immediately
where it is clear that the trial court would not take curative action in response to a mistrial motion, preservation principles do not demand that the motion be made immediately
the trial court did not err in admitting, in the absence of physical evidence, expert testimony that diagnosed a child as a victim of sexual abuse

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Richardson, Deits, Durham

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

18 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.