- Search with
- Parallel SearchEnter a full sentence between 5 and 30 words to find cases with conceptually similar sentences
- or
- Keyword SearchEnter keyword terms, accompanied by optional Boolean connectors
- ANDfraud AND damagesBoth terms in document
- ORcar OR automobileEither term in document
- NOTinfringement NOT patentTerm must not appear in document
- """due diligence"Exact match
- ()appeal AND (verdict OR judgment)Grouping terms
- *withdr*wSingle letter wildcard (withdraw, withdrew)
- !infring!Root expander (infringe, infringed, infringing)
- /ninvestor /5 diligenceTerms within n words of each other
- /sfees /s reasonableTerms within same sentence
- /padmissible /p warrantTerms within the same paragraph
State v. Stockton
310 Or. App. 116 (Or. Ct. App. 2021)4 Citing cases
State v. Travis
320 Or. App. 460 (Or. Ct. App. 2022) Cited 9 timesRejecting the state's argument that the trial court conducted balancing with regard to propensity evidence "by implication"
We review a trial court's determination of relevance under OEC 401 for errors of law. State v. Stockton , 310 Or. App. 116, 123, 483 P.3d 657 (2021). Likewise, we review a trial court's determination that other acts evidence is relevant and admissible under OEC 404(3) or OEC 404(4) for legal error.
State v. Bonczkowski
337 Or. App. 701 (Or. Ct. App. 2025)As a preliminary matter, we review a trial court's determination of relevance under OEC 401 for errors of law. State v. Stockton, 310 Or.App. 116, 123, 483 P.3d 657 (2021). We review a trial court's determination that other acts evidence is relevant and admissible under OEC 404(4) for legal error.
State v. Taylor
326 Or. App. 396 (Or. Ct. App. 2023) Cited 5 timesHolding that relevant evidence that does not require a propensity bridge is admissible to show a defendant's plan
We review a trial court's determination of relevance under OEC 401 for errors of law. State v. Stockton , 310 Or App 116, 123, 483 P.3d 657 (2021). Likewise, we review a trial court's determination that other-acts evidence is relevant and admissible under OEC 404(3) for legal error.
State v. Taylor
315 Or. App. 608 (Or. Ct. App. 2021) Cited 4 timesExplaining inferences that jury could conceivably draw
We review a trial court's determination of relevance under OEC 401 for errors of law. State v. Stockton , 310 Or. App. 116, 123, 483 P.3d 657 (2021). We likewise review a trial court's determination that other-acts evidence is relevant and admissible under OEC 404(3) for legal error.