State v. Hudson
This text of 808 P.2d 1023 (State v. Hudson) 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.
Opinion
Defendant appears to be appealing from a conviction for unauthorized departure, ORS 162.175, on the ground either that the statute is vague or that the state’s evidence was insufficient. The brief fails to set out the motion made below, including the grounds for that motion, fails to set out the pertinent portions of the record, fails to make proper references to the audiotape and fails to identify the applicable standard of review, all in violation of the Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure. As a result, there is no cognizable assignment of error.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
808 P.2d 1023, 106 Or. App. 768, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 609, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hudson-orctapp-1991.