State v. Jenkins
424 P.2d 894, 246 Or. 280, 1967 Ore. LEXIS 575
Opinion
Defendant appeals from a burglary conviction, contending that the court erred in excluding certain evidence.
No offer of proof was made and consequently, even *281 if the evidence was admissible, we have no way of determining whether the exclusion of the evidence was prejudicial to defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Jenkins, 424 P.2d 894, 246 Or. 280, 1967 Ore. LEXIS 575 (Or. 1967).
424 P.2d 894 (State v. Jenkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Busby
844 P.2d 897 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1993)
State v. Wonderling
799 P.2d 1135 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1990)
State v. Affeld
764 P.2d 220 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1988)
State v. Berry
707 P.2d 638 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1985)
State v. Luther
672 P.2d 691 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1983)
State v. Griffin
529 P.2d 399 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1974)
State v. Longoria
520 P.2d 912 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1974)
State v. Morales
513 P.2d 798 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1973)
Jones v. Mitchell Bros. Truck Lines
511 P.2d 347 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1973)
State v. Newman
506 P.2d 523 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1973)
State v. Walker
478 P.2d 643 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1971)