State v. Gover

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Gover

530 P.2d 1271, 20 Or. App. 226, 1975 Ore. App. LEXIS 1588

Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided January 27, 1975·No. No. C-74-03-0721·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, having been convicted of burglary in the first degree, ORS 164.225, appeals, contending that he was deprived of due process by comments the [227]*227trial judge made in the presence of the jury regarding defendant’s counsel. There is no merit to this contention. Hindman v. Coy, 207 Or 279, 286, 295 P2d 1097 (1956); State v. Jorgensen, 8 Or App 1, 492 P2d 312 (1971), Sup Ct review denied (1972).

Defendant made two other assignments of error. One he abandoned at oral argument before this court; the other does not warrant discussion.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, having been convicted of burglary in the first degree, ORS 164.225, appeals, contending that he was deprived of due process by comments the [227]*227trial judge made in the presence of the jury regarding defendant’s counsel. There is no merit to this contention. Hindman v. Coy, 207 Or 279, 286, 295 P2d 1097 (1956); State v. Jorgensen, 8 Or App 1, 492 P2d 312 (1971), Sup Ct review denied (1972).

Defendant made two other assignments of error. One he abandoned at oral argument before this court; the other does not warrant discussion.

Affirmed.

State v. Gover, 530 P.2d 1271, 20 Or. App. 226, 1975 Ore. App. LEXIS 1588 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

530 P.2d 1271 (State v. Gover) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related