State v. Hunter

821 P.2d 1132, 110 Or. App. 558, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 26
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedJanuary 8, 1992
Docket89-1084; CA A65794
StatusPublished

This text of 821 P.2d 1132 (State v. Hunter) 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. Hunter, 821 P.2d 1132, 110 Or. App. 558, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 26 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

The state concedes that the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss, because he had complied with ORS 135.760 and the burden was on the state to bring him to trial within 90 days. We accept the concession.

Reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment of dismissal.

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

Related

§ 135.760
Oregon § 135.760

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
821 P.2d 1132, 110 Or. App. 558, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hunter-orctapp-1992.