Kutsch v. Maass

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Kutsch v. Maass

837 P.2d 563, 115 Or. App. 380, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 1761

Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided September 30, 1992·No. 90-C-10741; CA A73776·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

The state concedes that the trial court erred in dismissing petitioner’s petition for post-conviction relief on the ground that it was barred by ORS 138.510(2), as amended by Or Laws 1989, ch 1053, § 18. The convictions that petitioner challenges became final before the effective date of the 1989 amendment. The amendment does not apply to a petition challenging a conviction that became final before the effective date of the amendment. Boone v. Wright, 314 Or 135, 836 P2d 727 (1992).

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

The state concedes that the trial court erred in dismissing petitioner’s petition for post-conviction relief on the ground that it was barred by ORS 138.510(2), as amended by Or Laws 1989, ch 1053, § 18. The convictions that petitioner challenges became final before the effective date of the 1989 amendment. The amendment does not apply to a petition challenging a conviction that became final before the effective date of the amendment. Boone v. Wright, 314 Or 135, 836 P2d 727 (1992).

Reversed and remanded.

Kutsch v. Maass, 837 P.2d 563, 115 Or. App. 380, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 1761 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

837 P.2d 563 (Kutsch v. Maass) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related