State v. Gert

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Gert

803 P.2d 785, 105 Or. App. 406, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 98

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 23, 1991

DocketC89-08-34058; CA A63118

StatusPublished

This text of 803 P.2d 785 (State v. Gert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Gert, 803 P.2d 785, 105 Or. App. 406, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 98 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of delivery of a controlled substance under ORS 475.992. Because she did not waive a jury trial in writing, as required by ORS 136.001, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

Because the issue will arise on retrial, we have reviewed defendant’s claim that her motion to suppress was erroneously denied. We conclude that the trial court properly denied the motion.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of delivery of a controlled substance under ORS 475.992. Because she did not waive a jury trial in writing, as required by ORS 136.001, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

Because the issue will arise on retrial, we have reviewed defendant’s claim that her motion to suppress was erroneously denied. We conclude that the trial court properly denied the motion.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

803 P.2d 785, 105 Or. App. 406, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 98, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gert-orctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack