From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Elliott v. Gladden

Oregon Supreme Court
Jun 29, 1966
244 Or. 134 (Or. 1966)

Summary

In Elliott v. Gladden, 244 Or. 134, 411 P.2d 287, cert den 384 U.S. 1020, 86 S Ct 1982, 16 L Ed2d 1043 (1966), we held that Neely would not be applied in cases "finally decided" before June 22, 1964, the date of the Escobedo decision.

Summary of this case from Haynes v. Cupp

Opinion

Argued January 31, 1966

Affirmed February 24, 1966 United States Supreme Court denied certiorari June 29, 1966

Appeal from Circuit Court, Marion County.

Affirmed.

LOREN HICKS, Judge.

Lawrence A. Aschenbrenner, Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant.

Wayne M. Thompson, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Robert Y. Thornton, Attorney General, Salem.

Before McALLISTER, Chief Justice, and PERRY, SLOAN, GOODWIN, DENECKE, HOLMAN and SCHWAB, Justices.


IN BANC


On July 26, 1963, petitioner Elliott was convicted in Lane county of the crimes of burglary and assault with intent to kill. On July 31, 1963, he was sentenced to maximum terms in the penitentiary. He did not appeal the convictions. Later he filed a petition for post-conviction relief. He alleged, and it was established by a hearing, that Elliott after his arrest and before he was advised of his right to counsel and to remain silent, confessed to the crimes. The confession was used against him at the trial. This case, therefore, presents the question: Will State v. Neely, 1965, 239 Or. 487, 395 P.2d 557, 398 P.2d 482, and Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 1964, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S Ct 1758, 12 L Ed2d 977, be given retrospective application to cases that had been concluded by a final judgment prior to the decisions in Escobedo and Neely? The trial court said "no." Petitioner appeals.

In reliance on the opinions in Linkletter v. Walker, 1965, 381 U.S. 618, 85 S Ct 1731, 14 L Ed2d 601, and Tehan v. United States, 1966, 382 U.S. 406, 86 S Ct 459, 15 L Ed2d 453, we hold that we will not give Neely and Escobedo retrospective application to the cases that had been "finally decided" before June 22, 1964, the date of the Escobedo decision. See Linkletter v. Walker, supra, 14 L Ed2d at 603 and 614.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Elliott v. Gladden

Oregon Supreme Court
Jun 29, 1966
244 Or. 134 (Or. 1966)

In Elliott v. Gladden, 244 Or. 134, 411 P.2d 287, cert den 384 U.S. 1020, 86 S Ct 1982, 16 L Ed2d 1043 (1966), we held that Neely would not be applied in cases "finally decided" before June 22, 1964, the date of the Escobedo decision.

Summary of this case from Haynes v. Cupp
Case details for

Elliott v. Gladden

Case Details

Full title:ELLIOTT v. GLADDEN

Court:Oregon Supreme Court

Date published: Jun 29, 1966

Citations

244 Or. 134 (Or. 1966)
411 P.2d 287

Citing Cases

State v. Evans

This court granted the plaintiff's (state's) petition for review of the Court of Appeals' opinion wherein…

North v. Cupp

We have established that retrospective application of Escobedo will be limited to cases which were not…